quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:

After all, Nemesis was meant to be all actiony to attract a wider audience, and it didn't, and annoyed the fans to boot.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saltah'na:
Ditto. I never liked the direction the Trek Enterprise was going since they came out with ST:ENT, and I doubt I'm going to like this film as well.

---

quote:

---

If you watch the TV series and many of the movies than - if you are a Star Wars fan like me - you always have the feeling that there is a discrepancy between the size of the alien worlds / the space ship(s) of the Federation and the locations where most of the scenes have been shot. In other words, the Bridge is more like a living room and does not match the size nor style of gigantic size of the Enterprise at all. It is certainly unbelievable because it's mostly the only place we get to see (and of course three or four other places, but all in all just 1 percent of the ship, I presume).

---

Uhhh... I don't understand this critique at all. I'm a fan of both Star Trek and Star Wars. Yes, the Star Destroyers are HUGE. The Enterprise isn't. I've never had a problem with Trek's scale when it came to ships. Everything seems to fit. The bridge is just the right size in relation with the ship. OK, Enterprise D's bridge felt a bit large, but the ship was larger and roomier than the "original."

As for any of the other spoilers... I really don't know if they are believable or not. It seems like the different Internet sites are just quoting each other. It might all be false. Of course, it might all be true.

Does anyone really have a problem with Kirk using his way with women to get the Kobyashi Maru reprogrammed? I don't know if I do or don't. On the one hand, it is Kirk. It fits Kirk's behavior and womanizing ways. On the other hand, it's a sterotype of Kirk. It's Kirk in bright, primary colors. It's a cartoon of Kirk.

I've always thought, based on the line from TWOK that KIRK was the one who reprogrammed the simulator. Further, based on the fact he received a commendation that the tampering wasn't discovered right away. Protestors?

More later...
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
I think the point was meant to be that the adjudicators said to themselves "Wait, what? He won?! But it's an unwinnable scenario! That's the whole point! How the hell did he DO that?!" Then, when they dicsovered the tampering, no doubt tried to expel him, only for some gruff no-nonsense old-school admiral/Academy chancellor to rule that changing the rules to ensure survival kinda makes sense in some situations. Hence the commendation, which would rather piss off anyone judged to have overall done better than Kirk at the Academy (after all, I don't think there's anything canon to say he particularly excelled during his Academy days, and we know he was a hellraiser and womaniser), hence the protests in the spoilers.

That's always been my take on it. It's what the spoilers have happening next that confuses me. Yes, said spoilers may be bullshit, but indulge me. He's given command of a ship to really prove himself? Hmm. Unless it's spmething a bit like ST2:TWOK, an advanced training cruise. Or maybe more like what happened on the Deffie-Valiant - Kirk is given sort-of command of the Enterprise while it's still really under the command of Captain Pike, only to have to take command for real when the Ozcredible Hulk attacks and Pike is injured or something (which does rather suck as a plotline, I can feel myself losing the will to live as I type).

(actually, such a special-scenario training/testing cruise could explain Lt. Piersall on the Nebbie-Prometheus, you know)

From then on, Kirk goes on to have a normal career as a young Starfleet officer (on the Republic and the Farragut) for the next ten years or so, until he finally makes Captain for real and is assigned the ship he first briefly served on.

So, it's possible and doesn't really go against the canon.
 

---

Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
 
That's because with the primary colors / stereotypes we know will happen in the movie it isn't Star Trek unless

Kirk is in command
The ship is the Enterprise
Kirk and Co. save the day

Anything else and the non-fans will go "Whut?"

Which is complete nonsense but hey, that's how life works.

I've been toying with an idea for the movie script. My idea was to come up with a script and then try to pass it off as the real thing. You know, like an April Fool's joke. I've been trying to insert the elements I've heard in spoilers (forgot the Kobyashi Maru). We know that the Enterprise will be in it and we know that the main characters will be Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the rest. The only way to get those to work is to do like you said above and have Kirk take command when Pike is injured (or, in my idea, captured/stranded away from the bridge during the crisis).

This is why I called this whole prequel idea a reboot. The more you stray away from canon with another canon project (it's a movie, it's canon) then the only other option is a reboot.

Of course, like you said, nothing is stated that Kirk and the rest did not serve on the Enterprise during their training just like Savvik and the cadets in TWOK.

It just strains credibility in the area of coincidence.

My biggest puzzle is getting Chekov into the situation. He was an ensin in TOS when Uhura and Sulu wer Lts. Obviously they weren't in the same graduating class at the Academy. Odds are they didn't even attend the Academy at the same time (or Chekov was a 1st year student when they graduated).

Let alone that Kirk, Spock, McCoy and Scotty are so much older that they should be well past their Academy days when the rest are there.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
/me walks in


FUCKING RESET BUTTON!!!!!!!OMGDOSHITTHTHEIRFUCKINGWAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYBEENDOINGITSINCEFIRSTCONTACTCREATEDTHELOOPHOLEBEOUTCHESlololo!!!!!!1111!!!!!111121111!!!!!!!


/me walks back out


 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
OH. and to make sure i drive this topic bus into oncoming traffic, anybody know what you call a Warforged Fighter/Warforged Juggernaut...

with a Dwarf's head instead of his normal head?
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
'San Francisco Fleet Yards' taken literally?
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Well the NX-01 and NX-02 where constructed in space. I wonder what made them go back to building on land.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
Well the NX-01 and NX-02 where constructed in space. I wonder what made them go back to building on land.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:
So you're saying it's was Professor Plum in the Library with an isowelder?

---

Frn'enchNim! *Casts Snuggle Ninja kittens on Nim before he can commment as the soft uber combine atttack of hundreds of cuddle kittens smites all with smiles and wonders of... of sh*t. who'a gonna FEED these kittens?*

the major portions probably were assembled in orbit, jsut the work STARTED on earth. you know, the stuff actually -sensitive- to vaccum exposure otherwise?
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:
And, welding? It seems a bit ordinary to me. Didn't someone point out in that BSG ep where they built the steath Viper that even today modern jet fighters aren't welded. . ?

---

I'm guessing I'm the one that said that, since I design aircraft structure. And you're right, they don't weld them, it's mostly hardware like rivets & bolts.

BUT... large ships like destroyers and aircraft carriers *do* have welded structure. It's all really dependent on your materials & structural requirements.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
AOL/Moviefone has released an authentic image of the new Enterprise, and here she is in all her full-size (1828x778) glory!

Got the link from this article.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Very clearly the original 1701, but with paneling and lettering looking more like the refit... hmm.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Hmm...I don't know. Judging from those nacelles it looks like that Re-imagined Enterprise from Sci-Fi meshes. In any case, I do believe I see a work bee or two in that shot.
 

---

Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
 
And by the way, it's not welding.. it's gamma-welding!

Okay.. we have an image of the new Enterprise.

Let's see:

- Constructed on the ground, which is fun. I have no particular problems with this idea. It's a pretty far-out high tech way to build a ship, but it looks more comfortable (for the crews) than building it in orbit. I'm sure they are perfectly capable of both kinds of construction. And it gives some impressive imagery like this, which shows off the size very dramatically.

- Those art-deco 'Bussard collectors', or at least the insides of the cool spinny things, look very good. It reminds me of the 'jet engine' like explanation Franz Joseph gave to warp drive.

- The letters, they be wrong! Meh.

- The rest of the nacelles look a bit strange to me at this point. Very organic, almost Batman-style.

- Ooh, it has visible phaser turrets a la TMP.

Now, I still don't know why they didnt just fully GO for a proper reboot. It obviously is at least a visual reboot, but by claiming they are 'not rebooting' they are needlessly pleasing the people that don't want ANY change. I've always been of the opinion that the only way forward for modern Trek is do clean up their continuity mess, and just start fresh. It looks like they might be secretly doing that here, and I really hope it works out.

It's not like they've touched the original 1960s Enterprise in any way by doing this. I mean.. all that is still there, including the fandom universe built around it. But I fear that many Star Trek forums will be full with crying Trekkies these coming weeks. I don't envy trying to make a movie for such a harsh, conservative audience.
 

---

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
 
Thing is between the time set for this movie and the events seen in 'The Cage' - the ship could have been refit to look like it does in TOS. As long as the basics are there - it shouldn't matter too much.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Visible Phaser turrets? Where?
 

---

Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Right above the dash, it looks like.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Looks like bolts to me, considering there are two more bumps below the dash. Kinda looks like the surface of the TMP Enterprise.
 

---

Posted by Brown_supahero (Member # 83) on :
 
Spinners!!!!
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Gamma welding was supposed to be joining the metals on a molecular level, wasn't it? Like, turning two pieces of metal into one piece by bonding the molecules along the sides? I like the idea of phase transition bonding...

Anyway, I think it's been made pretty clear that in the Star Trek universe, commuting to work in orbit wouldn't be anything more complicated than taking the metro into town is to us. Beam, shuttle, whatever...nobody thinks twice about it.
 

---

Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ft7WILemLU&feature=related

That's Koerner's.

I concur on the point about the nacelles looking Koernerish . . . there definitely seems to be a line of structure going from the top of the nacelle 1/3rd to midway back and down to beneath the Bussard collector, with extra humpiness above that line, much as happened on GK's. Note also the circle at the very front of the collector. And also the 'walkway' inset along the side of the nacelle (visible on the starboard nacelle of the movie pic with lights running down it, though it may be too low to be the same thing). It may be that the nacelle isn't missing her forward endcaps at all, but that they're transparent like on GK's.

As for the lettering, grrrdammit. I was always annoyed when I'd see people put the numbers on the flat part, and now they're going to think they were justified. And where's my TOS lettering? ST:ENT, ST9 . . . it's like none of these guys can find the old font. Grr.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Maybe they really can't. I mean, did they have 'fonts' in those days? They still called them typefaces, I think, and I've always wondered exactly how they got lettering to look so uniform without printing it, or how they got it superimposed over the film...I mean, where did the letters come from? Did they, what's it called, lithograph? the writing onto the film, or ... what? I know nothing about film-making except from the digital side of things..
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
They're using something close to the original font on the official website, which just makes it all the more strange that they've switched to Jeffries Extended, or whichever that is now.
 

---

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 

"I mean, did they have 'fonts' in those days? They still called them typefaces, I think..."

My understanding is that, technically, a typeface is a particular set of similarly-designed characters, while a font is a specific combination of typeface, size, style, etc.

That is, Times New Roman is a typeface. 12-point italicized Times New Roman is a font. These days, no-one draws the distinction, though.

And, regardless of which term you use, fonts/typefaces have been around for hundreds of years. Yes, they had them back in the dark, uncertain days of the 1960s.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
lol Well this is my point, I have absolutely *no* idea how that kind of thing worked prior to 1990 or so. I guess I'm lucky to even know about "movable type" printing.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
I've been idly pondering how to include whatever prop weapons feature in this film on my site. Do I just put them as part of the (already crowded) TOS/2260's section? Or give it a whole new section of it's own? Or compromise and shunt all pre-TOS TOS stuff (ie the Cage/WNMHGB weapons) into a 2250 section, and include STXI stuff therein? (not knowing the date setting of the new movie might make this quite premature now, and even incorrect in the future)

Anyway, I was playing around with link icons. And one thing I notice is that the Starfleet arrowhead as featured in the teaser is wider than usual, certainly wider than the version in the original blue/gold teaser poster image. Now, I'm sure the height-to-width ratio of the arrowhead has varied widely over the past 40+ years but it might (or might not) be significant, in that the version as seen on the Cage/WNMHGB uniforms was very wide indeed. The teaser arrowhead isn't as wide as that, but it's still one of the wider versions I've seen.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Wasn't the arrowhead at this point just the Enterprise arrowhead, and not the Starfleet arrowhead?
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
Yes. But it was still wider in the pilots than in the original series.
 

---

Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
 
Ah the good old days of Letraset and Chartpak.....

Long, long ago....in a technology now far far away... there existed Letraset & Chartpak.

These were transparent sheets that contained multiple examples of each number, letter, and punctuation of a particular typeface. These examples were like a 'dry-ink' printed on the underside of the sheet. you placed the sheet on the object you wished to letter, aligned baselines, and used a burnishing tool to transfer the ink from the sheet to the surface. Naturally, you had to have multiple point sizes and a HUGE amount of storage to use multiple fonts and there was always the fact that you would almost invariably NOT have the right amount of a particular letter and have to use another sheet.

Ah....the.....well....not so good old days.

HERE is an example.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Is that anything like how they put text onto film?
 

---

Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
I still have some of that stuff, Wiz.
 

---

Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shik:
I still have some of that stuff, Wiz.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The359:
Either the lettering is effing massive, or the ship has gotten smaller. Anyone want to start counting decks?

Here's a camcorder copy of the trailer

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by HerbShrump:
Yep, nice Starfleet logo on the pole next to the lightpost. http://www.aintitcool.com/images2007/TrekSetBig3.JPG

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:
I wouldn't be too concerned about that. The notion of different patches for each ship seemed a bit silly anyway, and most of the other designs were rubbish, to boot.

---

What about in Enterprise? Granted, we only saw a few, and they were nicely thought out.
 

---

Posted by shikaru808 (Member # 2080) on :
 
Yeah but those resembled more of our modern day space shuttle flights than anything else. I wouldn't mind a retcon of that little detail.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I guess it wouldn't be THAT bad. Hell, they have pretty much rethought the whole ship building thing.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Rethought? That infers that there was a thought or notion of how they built ships to begin with. At best, all we've seen up to this point has been the final assembly area. We've never seen where they "lay down the keel" before.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
It infers nothing - it IMPLIES! *slams a dictionary onto your head*
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
oooooohhhh! Cat Fight! *breaks out the popcorn*

Btw dan, did you enjoy recent Q (1094~1095)?

me thinks she really is Pizza-Gril...
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
She miiiight be. And Pizza Girl would be a really cool promo idea in real life.

But now the drama thickens re Sven v Faye. It's like a soap opera that I actually enjoy!
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Watch out for Hanners, she could be the killer.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
http://trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=49806&page=2

Already removed from AICN & Trekmovie.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Interesting! I'm liking the look of this.
 

---

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
 
Looks like they've yanked them from Trek BBS too.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
http://s294.photobucket.com/albums/mm81/doofustuesday/

That shuttle design, inside and out, looks terrific. Looks like 21st century tech mixed with 23rd century tech. Perfect. I love the whole warp nacelle = jet engine look for both the shuttle and the Enterprise. Although methinks they might have scavenged parts from the Nemesis Argo shuttle, cuase the rear & wings are very similar.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
Weirdly, my favourite thing in these photos is the miners' helmets. They look just how I'd imagine they would if there'd been a big budget TOS movie in the '60s.

I'm not too keen on the new arrowhead, though. It just looks ugly IMO. Still, there's a chance that the Enterprise has her own, nicer looking version.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
I wonder if the set is supposed to be Delta Vega. It would be a nice reference.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I wonder if that is an Enterprise shuttle. It looks like a cross between a Shuttlepod and the standard TOS shuttle. Wonder what those weird engine things are for? Maybe it is a planetary transport.
 

---

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
 
I like the minimalist usage of the arrow head on that uniform (or whatever it is). Kind of looks like a T'Pol-esque Vulcan catsuit.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
fuck! someone post a fucking pic!!!! or email. something for me to mecha-masterbate too????
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
Dude, calm your pensive wetness down. I posted a link in my last reply. Go there and take care of your member.
 

---

Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean:
I wonder if that is an Enterprise shuttle. It looks like a cross between a Shuttlepod and the standard TOS shuttle. Wonder what those weird engine things are for? Maybe it is a planetary transport.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dukhat:
Dude, calm your pw down. I posted a link in my last reply. Go there and take care of your member.

---

Link bad (though its possible the issue is the boat atm. i'll have to check off ship at the rec center when i get there tommorrow). sorry, just very curious...
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Could be a Starfleet mining operation, was what I was thinking...dusty dirty shuttle from spending most of its time hopping around in a dusty dirty environment.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
Well apparently the whole film's finished filming now (aside from possible reshoots, etc), so we might not get any new sneaky snaps for a while yet.

I'm curious how this Federation mining facility fits into the story since I don't remember it being mentioned in any of the leaked script reports. Hopefully that means the leaks were bogus.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Or the whole movie is bogus and turns out to be a sequel to Clovershit!
 

---

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
Hey, that's like the title but with a twist.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
...And a squat.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
And a heeeUUUURGGG*grunt*!
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
Well, it did eat most of NYC. Thats some roughage.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Daniel Butler:
Or the whole movie is bogus and turns out to be a sequel to Clovershit!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Ginger Beacon:
Well, it did eat most of NYC. Thats some roughage.

---

quote:

---

Gene Roddenbery thought that all the people we saw were officers, so does that mean we'll only see officer cadets?

---

Um. Cadets, almost by definition, are in training to become officers. Enlisted personnel don't go to service Academies.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Well, maybe the academy is like boot camp, and then there is some sort of OCS, or for pilots, flight school, or Tactical school and so on.

I know in France they cound grades down from kindergarten. So Senior year in High school ( around 17yrs old) is year 1. If I survive being a Sophmore, I'll be happy.
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay:

quote:

---

Gene Roddenbery thought that all the people we saw were officers, so does that mean we'll only see officer cadets?

---

Um. Cadets, almost by definition, are in training to become officers. Enlisted personnel don't go to service Academies.

---

All right smarty pants.

What I meant was, given that outside of the Kirk era films, we've only seen a handfull of crew from the other ranks, is just about everyone in starfleet an officer?

I can cope with the idea as it's a civillian organisation the jobs that men and other ranks do in todays militaries could be done by junior officers, but I'd just like some on-screen clarity.

Is the Acadamy only for officers, or all who work for SF?
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
O'Brien enlisted in SF at age 18... so enrollment age for officer training is probably the same.
 

---

Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
 
I'd say 18 Earth years for humans and whatever adult age for other species.
 

---

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Daniel Butler:
Or the whole movie is bogus and turns out to be a sequel to Clovershit!

---

Or Jar Jar's Big Adventure.

---

No - Jar Jar Binks presents: Star Wars Holiday Special II. (Featuring the Ewok Dancers)
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I don't think Natalie Portman will get stoned like Carrie Fisher did though.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Too bad.

I was wondering about the academy last night too. What I was thinking was, do they have a usable degree after they get out? Like, if they serve for a few years in Starfleet as a warp field specialist, presumably having studied warp mechanics in the academy, then decide to resign, can they go to work somewhere as a civilian doing something with warp mechanics? Like how if you go into the military today and study computer science or something, then after you leave the military you have an actual computer science degree.
 

---

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
We've seen plenty of characters who were in Starfleet to further their non-Starfleet careers. Uh, haven't we? (It's been strongly implied in lots of cases anyway; all those scientist types. I think it is explicit in that Voyager attempt at "Lower Decks," with the guy who joined up to further his astrophysics career only to get stuck with a much longer billet than he had intended.)
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
I just saw "I just joined to pay for dental school" on BSG and thought fondly of this thread.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Sorry for the double. The editing window, she has closed.

I found this on Google Images while looking for something else. I dunno what it is - the page Google said contained it, er, didn't. So I don't know if it's a fan thing or promo material or what, but the supposedly-containing page *was* at Trekmovie.com, so I'd guess fan made. The nacelles don't look...QUITE...as bad here.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
I believe that's the Koernerprise from a while back.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Yep, that's her. I never noticed the multiple support brackets going to the deflector dish before. THey make the dish look so fagile. Beautiful view though.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
It really reminds me of a prettier version of that monstrous movie-extrapolation.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
http://trekmovie.com/2008/05/27/spoilers-details-on-star-trek-movie-ships/
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
That Koernerprise looks beautiful, I love the nacelle pylons. I've never liked the 1701 refit's pylons, the way they taper outwards, like bell-bottom pants. Makes them look like they'd break off in a sharp turn.

EDIT: A rom(ul)an commander called Nero? How friggin original. What was wrong with one of the "consonant-apostrophe" names? Blech.
Well, I gotta say, just the thought of getting to see genuine bridge scenes again, after all this time, so looking forward to it. The atmosphere and all that.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Some more details about the movie, including a description of a new Starfleet Vessel.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
I'm guessing that the 25 year old ship with a saucer and nacelles above and below the saucer is the U.S.S. Kelvin.

I also hope they show the tons of ships that the cadets get assigned to. At least there'll be a lot of name-dropping.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
Is it possible they (Paramount) got the rights to one of Fasa's (or Star Fleet Battles) over and under nacelle ships? probably nothing like the Saladin but maybe like the Larson? what about the one ship from the calaendar (and Vanguard ser, the one with the engeinering hull IN the saucer?ies)
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
No, I'm sure it'll be a completely original design.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Well, I'm pretty sure that this re-boot will screw with current continuity in some way. Perhaps this will start another official Trek continuity. Kind of like the Transformers franchise did with the 2007 film. THat takes place in a whole different continuity than the 80's cartoon, but features many of the same characters.

Just think, "Enterprise" probably would have been better in a re-boot universe. Who knows...
 

---

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
 
Hopefully not anything like a saladin.
Lazy-ass design at it's worst.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Or the Akula Class


 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I never liked how the deflector dish was placed on the Saladin. Looked like it was going to break off. Maybe it was retractable.
 

---

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
 
The Saladin sucks waaaay more.
Either the Connie is grossly inefficent (needing that secondary hull for engineering) or the Saladin would have to have no engineering section or warpcore.

It's just a silly cut-n-paste without any thought put into it.
I really dig the FH Dreadnaught, but the saladin is just lame.

I can almost go for the Akula- if the engineering dept was in the saucer and everything was crammed as hell with minimal crew and no shuttlebay, etc.
It'd look nice of it had some sort of extended saucer...possibly just an extra deck in the saucer even: then it would sorta follow a reverse Constalation design lineage.


Still, nothing is worse than Jackill's Shanks class- just a saucer with nacelles sticking out the sides!
WTF?!?
Jackill's got some great stuff, but this aint one of them.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Have you seen the USS Falcon?
 

---

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
 
A Connie saucer with 4 Oberth nacelles pasted on... Mmmmm... sexy.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Aww... It looks like the little Constellation that couldn't...
 

---

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
 
Not worth the puke threatening to heave from by guts after looking at it.
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
The Saladin sucks waaaay more.
Either the Connie is grossly inefficent (needing that secondary hull for engineering) or the Saladin would have to have no engineering section or warpcore.

---

quote:

---

That's a silly notion because it would mean the Connie Refit is less advanced for having to use the secondary hull as engineering (and it spans much of the secondary hull).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
Dude, in TOS engineering was in the saucer.....

---

Aw geez, not this again. Suffice to say I disagree. Moving on?
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 
Oh yes, well, if you disagree...
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
someone clicky a pic from 'A Mirror, Darkly', the one showing the skematic of the engineering and Nacelles. pretty sure that pic alone will prove it's cannon that engineering was mostly in the Secondary Hull...
 

---

Posted by shikaru808 (Member # 2080) on :
 
I still feel bad for the poor schmucks who have to work in the neck of the Connie's...
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pensive's Wetness:
someone clicky a pic from 'A Mirror, Darkly', the one showing the skematic of the engineering and Nacelles. pretty sure that pic alone will prove it's cannon that engineering was mostly in the Secondary Hull...

---

Yes, it has certainly been retconned within the fictional context of the show(s). But that wasn't the context of the discussion at hand. I was responding to the comments made about the Saladin/Hermes design being weak, nonsensical, or otherwise poorly conceived. At the time, given what was established and intended by the makers of TOS and TAS, it and the other FJ designs made perfect sense and were (IMO) quite elegant. That's all I was getting at.

And it's canon, BTW.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Maybe they get hazard pay...
 

---

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by shikaru808:
I still feel bad for the poor schmucks who have to work in the neck of the Connie's...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
...add a second vent thingie on the nacelle's other side to balance the design, etc.[/QB]

---

quote:

---

In theory, the uniforms should look like the ones in the The Cage right? The TOS blue/gold/red combo wouldn't come into style until years later. Or are they retconning that?

---

The movie takes place at several different points in history, so it's possible that we'll see the original "Cage" uniforms too.
 

---

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
Well, technically, shouldn't any Academy scenes have uniforms that look like the shiny silver number that Finnegan wore in "Shore Leave"?
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Chris Pine has oddly pointy eyebrows. At first I thought I was looking at Spock. This Nero fellow doesn't look all that Romulan. Perhaps the missing ear is a battle injury or something, but the tattoos look cool. Still, looks like this movie is starting to grow on me. I can't wait to see the new ( hopefully somewhat old) Enterprise.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
... growls quietly Interesting...
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Hm. Zachary Quinto at least *looks* like Spock in that picture, far more than I was expecting. Zoë Saldana looks nothing at all like Uhura, though. She also doesn't seem to be wearing her hair the way Uhura did.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Nero's tattoos look like something you'd see on a Sith Lord from Star Wars. Though it may indicate he's not necessarily an operative of the Romulan government. Maybe he's some kind of rebel.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Yeah, he could be a hired operative, to protect the Romulans' annonimity just in case whatever they are trying to do fails. ( which, I give a 99% chance of happening, as our heros will undoubtedly save the day). Then again, having the Romulans go back and screw with time may be Abrahm's way of retconning Star Trek, allowing for some inconsistancies in the timeline. Kind of like how anything after 2064 may or may not have been altered after First Contact, and possibly changing everything after that point in history. *Cough Enterprise Cough*
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
Explain... as in ENT never occuring? or justifying it?
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Some people said the Borg wreckage found in the Arctic changed the timeline somehow so that the inconsistencies in ENT are actually *not* inconsistencies, and that everything went back the 'right' way after the Temporal Cold War was resolved.
 

---

Posted by shikaru808 (Member # 2080) on :
 
Those people are dumb. ENT seriously had potential to be soo much more but just didn't make the cut at all.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Pensive: yeah, justifying the inconsistancies.

I won't mind this movie as long as it doesn't change too radically. I mean, I won't care if I see a slightly different phaser design, or if a console on the bridge looks a bit different, because, afterall this is trek as invisioned and created by someone who has never done trek before. I just don't want them to screw with established canon too much.

Anyways, it's the discussions over minor inconsistancies and discrepencies between events and technology that contributes to Flare being such a fun place.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
And here I thought it was the rampant drug abuse.
 

---

Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
 
I like this Nero. The tattoos look like they echo the shapes of the TOS Romulan helmets, with a little TNG/Nemesis thing going on around the bridge of the nose.

The tattoo may be a personal thing. By the looks of him (scarred and unshaven), he isn't necessarily on official military business. He's probably slightly crazy in the head.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Maybe the Romulans and the Federation are all buddy-buddy post-Shinzon and this guy is all "Nu-uh we're superior species remember" so he goes rogue to change the past.
 

---

Posted by shikaru808 (Member # 2080) on :
 
Well apparently he abides to some rule from the Empire, Bana mentions that he has relatively few scenes in the movie so it's really all up in the air. I wonder how they're going to insert the Orion slave girl...
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Its simple. She's the one Nero is working for.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
No, she's really the brains behind the operation. Nero's only a figurehead.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Nero not necessarily a Romulan?

http://trekmovie.com/2008/07/23/kurtzman-answer-question-what-is-up-with-neros-ear/
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
Or, he is a Romulan, and they've digitally altered his ear so as not to give that away on the poster (which sould piss people off when the film came out and his pointy lughole was seen to be intact); or he is Romulan but had his ear chewed by his over-affectionate childhood pet Targ. Or whatever. But where it gets really tricky is, suppose it's his right ear that was actually damaged, and they've reversed the image so as not to reveal he's a Romulan on the poster? Bit of a coincidence that his one damaged ear (assuming they're not both damaged) is the one that's visible on the poster (unless they chose to put him on a left-hand quadrant of the poster so his undamaged Romulan ear was hidden). . .

Oh, God. Thinking about all this has made me lose the will to live! I don't fucking know, we'll find out when we get to see the first proper image of him!
 

---

Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
 
He's the captain's clone sent back in time to suck out his blood.

No wait, wrong movie..
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
out of his ass, mind you.

don't think they made a movie about that (yet), though i'm pretty sure... it's been Manga'ed, they make Manga about anything in japan...


LOL

"2. Harry - July 23, 2008
Nero is FutureGuy!"

hehe, actually THAT would be sick if that was true...
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Am I the only one that thinks his eyebrow and high forehead ridge (barely visible) resemble a Klingon?
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
...mix breed? Old School Klingon (wtf are they called? in Klingon?)
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Actually, now that you mention it, that, and his beard makes him look a bit like the Klingons as we saw them in TOS. Which, unless he was a time traveling Klingon, would make sense for the time period, and adhere to the canon established in Enterprise...
 

---

Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
 
Keeping in mind that, from a continuity standpoint, no one in the Federation knew what Romulans looked like until "Balance of Terror." So if our pre-TOS series heroes see Nero, then they shouldn't know he's a Romulan. Would make sense that he's an agent though.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Yeah. If the Romulans wanted to keep annonymous, they could have just surgically altered his ears, and given him some tatoos to look like a member of a species that we don't yet know about. If he really is a Romulan that is.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
http://trekmovie.com/2008/08/09/vegascon-08-new-star-trek-movie-posters-with-four-new-cast-images/

Pegg and Urban are almost unrecognisable.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I can understand recasting the leads, but some of the actors don't even look much like the character they're portraying. At least Pine and Quinto look like Kirk and Spock ( as we know them), or look at least similar enough to the original actors that you could say that the new actors portray younger versions of the characters.

Still, I don't mind too much, as long as the movie itself isn't complete crap. If it is, the fact that some of the characters look completely different will just be an extra kick in the rear. We only have 9 months left to wait now anyway.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Pegg looks nothing like Scotty, Cho looks nothing like Sulu, and Yelchin looks nothing like Chekov...and Salanda looks *nothing* like Uhura. I don't really have an opinion about Pine, but Quinto I can believe as Spock (which came as a huge shock to me when I saw his poster). So, I agree, Sean - this better be a good movie or I'm going to be bitching a lot about poor casting B)
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Many times, it's not the actor's face but their actual *acting* that will bring across a convincing portrayal of a known character. So I wouldn't write them off just yet simply because they don't look absolutely perfect.
 

---

Posted by OverRon (Member # 2036) on :
 
That looks spookily like Alexander Siddig in one of those posters
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
I thought so, too.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Of all the actors they've cast, I've always been impressed by their acting ability. I eagerly await their performances.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
Our cups runneth over: http://trekmovie.com/2008/10/15/more-star-trek-images-enterprise-crew-nero/
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
They also have a shot of the Kelvin under attack. The bridge looks...busy (with a notable lack gummi buttons, instead there appear to be touch screens(TOSCARS!)).
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
In that pic with Kirk falling into the snow, could that be a 'TOS' escape pod...?

Also, the uniforms, seem to have an ENT style "stripe" of fabric on the shoulders and upper torso area. I like it. Still don't like Kirk in Black though. I like the shot of the Kelvin. Looks like they have messed with the registry scheme again...if the ship is supposed to be older than the 1701, and the regs go chronologically, than NCC (something)0514, then it would have been made in the 2300's. But, they probably changed the whole thing anyways...
 

---

Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
 
I hope the registry's not NCC-0514, with a placeholder zero.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
look beautiful.... me has high hopes?
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 
That bridge is positively atrocious.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
The Kelvin's registry is indeed NCC-0514. There's a full view of the ship on the TrekBBS. It's a saucer with two nacelles, one above and one below the saucer.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
I don't think those are two nacelles. It looks more like a deflector dish above and most likely a nacelle below, although you can't see much of it. I suppose it works as an older ship, though I think the flatness of the saucer makes it quite ugly.

That bridge is really gonna take some getting used to, but it's not terrible. I quite like the panel going along the top with a graphic displaying star systems. At least they've taken elements from the original bridge and maintained a fairly similar layout, rather than doing something completely new. The only thing I don't like is the station where the lady in the skirt is standing. It's probably Uhura's station, brought out from the back of the bridge so she isn't turning around all the time, but to me it looks like a reception desk in a futuristic restaurant.

Scotty steps onto the bridge "table for one, lassie."

The uniforms are great over all, but I'm not fond of Kirk wearing black. Kirk's gold uniform is iconic.. now he looks like he's gonna rob a bank.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
I'm seeing only one nacelle (barely).
USS Kelvin

And the bridge reminds me a lot of the TMP version.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
Trust me, there are two nacelles.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20233502,00.html?cnn=yes&iref=werecommend

That would seem to suggest that in at least one part of the film they're using the Cage/WNMHGB laser pistol, which had a revolving barrel.

EDIT: Ahh! That nacelle-eye, it follows you around the room!
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
SPOILERS
$
$
$
$

$
$
$

$
$

$
$
$

quote:

---

Aboard a monstrous and gloomy interstellar cruiser — part Death Star, part Mordor

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dukhat:
The Kelvin's registry is indeed NCC-0514.

---

A small gripe. Of all the potential things to be rebooty/prequelly weird on, though, a "leading zero problem" was not something I'd have ever expected to have to worry about.
 

---

Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
 
I'm curious . . . maybe it's just me, but having the registry number in huge text on the flat front of the saucer near the rim just makes the ship look like a cheap small toy.

Is it that this appearance has some objective truth to it, or am I poisoned by the fact that small cheap Star Trek toys usually had the registry number too big and on the rim?

Just a thought.
 

---

Posted by Brown_supahero (Member # 83) on :
 
Is that a nacelle on top or a deflector?
 

---

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 

"Is that a nacelle on top or a deflector?"

Goodness, why did no-one notice this earlier?
 

---

Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
 
I'm guessing a deflector pod akin to some fan ship we've seen over the years. a full-size nacelle trails below the saucer as in the FJ classics.

Mark
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
Ahhhhnyway, what's the straw pole here? Good, bad, indifferent? I'm currently on "AHHHHHH! My eyes! THEY BURN!!!"
 

---

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
 
Sort of indifferent at the moment. I just don't want to over-spoil myself like I did with other Trek movies - to the point of ruining the movie.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
I would rather have New Trek than No Trek.
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
I don't hate the ship design outright, but I hate the rendering of it, and the decisions with the details. The 'rocket/pulse pods' are lifted from NuBSG, the lettering makes the ship look like a bad toy, and the panel texturing is straight out of a PS1 game.

Sadly, this has been confirmed as a 'final'. Ugh.

And, I'll disagree on one big thing. "New Trek" could suck so bad that it could guarantee "No Trek". I really don't think Abrams, who disliked Trek and is a Warsie, was a wise move. But, we'll see I guess.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Have people seen this? I haven't been keeping up with this thread.

The bridge isn't ... right...at all...
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Yeah I stated it looked busy and had no buttons.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Actually I rather like that bridge.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
I like it too but it's not right for the E-nil at all. It looks nothing like 'contemporary' designs.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
I love it. I love everything about it. I love everything I've seen and heard so far about it. I haven't been this excited since 1987, when I heard Star Trek was coming back to TV again as Star Trek: The Next Generation.

If you all just think like I do, you'll all be a lot happier. Trust me. I know what I'm talking about.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
I'm hoping the Kirk-in-black thing is just the undershirt and he actually has the proper gold uniform...
 

---

Posted by HopefulNebula (Member # 1933) on :
 
All I have to say is: ZQ as Spock. OM NOM NOM.

I'm trying to keep it positive.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Ginger Beacon:
at some point Sylar takes Kirks power.

---

This may be the best description of that photo ever. What woul Kirk's power be anyway?
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
You Know!
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Daniel Butler:
I like it too but it's not right for the E-nil at all. It looks nothing like 'contemporary' designs.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Ginger Beacon:
at some point Sylar takes Kirks power.

---

This may be the best description of that photo ever. What woul Kirk's power be anyway?

---

Lady-pulling power?

Ability to win the no-win scenarios and to cheat death one more time?

Time travel?
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
The ability. To. Punctuate his speach. As he talks.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
soooooo.... *breaths deeply*


IS THE KELVIN A SALADIN CLASS OR WHAT????????
(i figured that would cause some discussion besides nuKirk's Libido )
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
Nope, it's a dinner plate with a bridge and a ton of Star Wars model crap thrown on it.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Well I seem to recall a design (fandom or RPG?) which was just a saucer with a nacelle on top and a small secondary hull on the bottom.


 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
Vanguard: Zing! :,)

Yes, I can't deny feeling a bit of Nabooian traits in the overall theme of TMP-A (even the parts that are burning, from Gospel of Attack of the Clones, Chapter one, verse three)
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
Remind me to never, ever, ever click on an imageshack link again. Took my system down with all the ads and crap that were SUPPOSED to be blocked.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Hmm...no problems on this end. What browser were you using and how strict were your security settings?
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
'medium', and IE 7.whateveritistoday ...

I checked for spyware just in case, it was definately a hit from imageshack. (You're not the only one to be so affected, I've noticed a LOT of sites getting worse and worse ads of late.)

Also, read the EW blurb on the new Trek...

The plot of the movie is to EXPLICITLY 'reset the canon', so that nothing from TOS onward ever happened.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Can't we just accept that it is a different continuity altogether, like the many Transformers series? They all have similar backgrounds, with much of the history being the same, and many of the same characters ( and character histories for that matter), but they are accepted to be each a completely different "universe". I don't see why this couldn't apply to Trek as well. What we have known up untill now could be considered the "Trek Generation 1". This would also allow things like The Starfleet Museum continuity to be possible, without ignoring Enterprise and other series, as it could take place in a whole different universe.

If the movie doesn't murder what has been established as Trek gospel so far, I'd have no problem accepting the new movie as a sort of "Trek Generation 2". We wouldn't have to try to fit any of the redesigns into established continuity. Although, it would be fun to try and bend, and hypothesize, and ignore, to try and get this movie to fit into what we already know as Star Trek.
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
I don't mind that it's a new continuity, as I can forgive that.

What I -do- mind is that Abrams, who is on record as not liking Star Trek is getting to do his "I'm remaking it so Star Wars fans will like it" schtik.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Hey, I'm all for it. If Abrams successfully reboots the franchise and draws a lot of interest, we may get more movies and/or a new series. The present methodology regarding Trek and its implementation in a series format has gone stagnant. The injection of Manny Coto into ENT s4 was just too late to save the show.
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
But if it's not STAR TREK in any other way but names, then what's the point? Read that Entertainment Weekly article, and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.

This isn't being made a "Star Trek" adventure, it's a 'dumbed down' adventure with lots of Star Wars and NuBSGisms and pretty-faces (and those are the men). At least, according to Abrams and EW.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
Honestly, I don't know where you're getting this negativity from. JJ Abrams, Damon Lindelof, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman have repeatedly stated that they value Star Trek and are honestly trying to make a movie that will reinvigorate the show, and that everybody will be happy with, with a few exceptions (the ultranerd faction of Star Trek fan who will constantly obsess over every single minute detail of the original series, and who think Abrams is the new Antichrist because he's (God forbid) ignoring certain things about a show made in 1966 so that his new movie in 2009 will actually make sense).

quote:

---

This isn't being made a "Star Trek" adventure, it's a 'dumbed down' adventure with lots of Star Wars and NuBSGisms and pretty-faces (and those are the men). At least, according to Abrams and EW.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dukhat:
Honestly, I don't know where you're getting this negativity from. JJ Abrams, Damon Lindelof, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman have repeatedly stated that they value Star Trek [Because in this PC world, PC suckage-up sells to the public and the sponsers and the folks who pony up the $ for future projects] and are honestly trying to make a movie that will reinvigorate the show, and that everybody will be happy with [The old effort of pleasing nobody as a result, usually], with a few exceptions (the ultranerd faction of Star Trek fan who will constantly obsess over every single minute detail of the original series, and who think Abrams is the new Antichrist because he's (God forbid) ignoring certain things about a show made in 1966 so that his new movie in 2009 will actually make sense).

quote:

---

This isn't being made a "Star Trek" adventure, it's a 'dumbed down' adventure with lots of Star Wars and NuBSGisms and pretty-faces (and those are the men). At least, according to Abrams and EW. [Follow the cash flow---> feed the PR machine more bullshit for the pulbic to eat please]

---

So you're basing this on what the EW reporter had to say? Could it be possible that the reporter has probably never seen an episode of Star Trek in his life, and is just getting paid to write a bunch of crap that he has no knowledge about other than his interview with Abrams & Co.?

I'm sorry, but Berman/Braga "Enterprise" Trek was dumbed-down Trek. This is not.

---

quote:

---

I think that this film has the capacity to split current fans right down the middle - those that are truely excited about a brand new adventure with their childhood heroes after it seemed that Trek had finaly died, and those that think that despite all of the talk by Abrams, the film is simply a reboot walking over all they love about Trek.

---

But you see, that's where you're wrong. You are basing this thought on the flawed idea that this movie is being made for Trek fans and Trek fans only. It's not. It's being made for the average moviegoing public, of which Trek fans are a tiny minority. If Abrams catered solely to the Trek fans, only Trek fans would go see the movie, and that wouldn't help anything because they were going to see the movie anyway. He has to cater to a wider base of people than just the guys who post at TrekBBS, if he wants his movie to make any money. However, what I've seen so far doesn't indicate that he's "walking all over" what the fans expect Trek to be. He's doing his best to make a film with 2008 production values that will reintroduce Star Trek to the masses, and hopefully create a whole new generation of fans.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
This reminds me a lot of what was being said about the Transformers movie last year, with Michael Bay at the helm. And, yet, as it turns out, the film didn't completely rape people's childhood memories, because it respected what was already there, and built off of it. Honestly, that's what I expect this film to do.

If it means that Star Trek has a chance to live on into the 21st century ( because let's face it, ENT was stillborn.), I'd be willing to live with a few continuity fudge ups, or even having to accept that this is an alternate continuity. As long as it still has Star Trek's ideals at heart, you could paint the Enterprise pink and make it the first vessel of the Lollipop class for all I care. Although, now that I think of it, that would disappoint me a bit, because everyone knows that the first vessel of the Lollipop class is the USS Lollipop...
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
I appreciate your enthusiasm Dukhat, but I don't share it. I think there are a quite a number of people (and flareites) who are on either side of the fence. We'll just have to wait and see.

I just think that this film will dick on TOS, and that the Star Trek fan in me will notice. I expect it will be a good film, and that I'll like it.

I even expect nuTrek fans to be made, allthough I doubt they'll go and investigate TOS. The film will make a fortune, there will be lot's of sequals, and well all either be very happy, or very miserable.

I just have mixed feelings and strong doubts.
 

---

Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vanguard:
"No one's done a Star Trek movie yet that's dealt with time travel! Let's do THAT!"

---

quote:

---

Like Kirk and Spock meeting Romulans face to face before TOS... and that everyone's roughly the same age, regardless of their rank, and that Kirk leaps from being a cadet to Captain...

---

quote:

---

Besides, is it so hard to believe that I think the new bridge set sucks completely on its own merits (like an Apple store barfed) rather than comparing it to the TOS set, which I honestly DO find superior and more believable?

---

No, it isn't hard to believe at all that you think the new bridge sucks...'cause that's what you said you thought :-)
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Well, there's 8 years difference between Urban and Pine... Which works as according to Trek canon there is only 6 years between McCoy and Kirk (although there was 11 between Kelley and Shatner).
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 
1. We have virtually no specifics at all about the movie's plot or timeline yet. All we really know are that Romulans are the baddies, there is time travel involved, and the film will be set partly in the 24th century and partly during Kirk & the gang's Academy days.

2. Remember the uproar we all got into about things on ENT that we thought were continuity errors but actually turned out to not explicitly contradict anything in the canon, but just force us to re-interpret our view of it? I suspect there'll be a lot of that stuff in this movie. That doesn't make it any more of a reboot than ENT was.

3. Also as with ENT, I'm sure there will also be some genuine continuity errors. (Though, as per #1 above, it's premature at this point to try to determine what they may be.) Has there EVER in the history of the franchise been an instance of a prequel/time travel story that didn't have at least a few? That doesn't make it a reboot either.

I have no idea whether the movie will be great or suck. I tend to suspect the latter, (I hate the bridge too) but it's immaterial. It may be totally implausible to some of us and utterly believable to others. But there is no evidence that I know of at this point to suggest it isn't intended to be part of the already-established continuity.

-MMoM
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
Dude, if you're going to use Enterprise to defend your version of 'canon integrity'...
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
....you forgot to finish that sentence.

Nothing wrong with ENT. You just have to get off your high horse, is all.
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
Oh sod it. I'm just gonna be a big fairy and go all zen about it. Shit happens, Archer was a nancy, but Trek is Trek.

We've stuck with it through worse, much worse. Remember the Boy? Did we give up because of him? No we did not.

Remember that moment when we all realised that Voyager had become the Janeway and Seven show? Mind that was different. Jeri Ryan was crumpet extrordinaire.

Remember Star Trek V? Probably best if we didn't there, on second thoughts.

But - we've stuck with it through worse, and for all its faults, this new film is the future of the trek.

So let's just wait and see. And if all else fails, remember: it can't be as bad Spocks Brain.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Hey leave Enterprise alone. It not his fault he was born retarded.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
^You just about summed it up right there, Mars.
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vanguard:
Dude, if you're going to use Enterprise to defend your version of 'canon integrity'...

---

quote:

---

The point is, ENT was not intended to take place in a different continuity from any of the other shows or movies. It's part of the Star Trek canon. Whether it was good or not has not a thing to do with it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Ginger Beacon:
Remember Star Trek V? Probably best if we didn't there, on second thoughts.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dukhat:
I wish people would come to the conclusion, as I have, that Enterprise was just a holodeck fantasy of Riker's. All four years of it, and the events of those years didn't actually happen that way. That's how I justify how bad the show was. But of course, no one is going to see the truth.

---

Actually I prefer to think that TATV was actually Riker's fantasy and Trip didn't die. Everything else can stand as is.
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dukhat:
I wish people would come to the conclusion, as I have, that Enterprise was just a holodeck fantasy of Riker's. All four years of it, and the events of those years didn't actually happen that way. That's how I justify how bad the show was.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Daniel Butler:
I saw VOY S7 and thought "this show sucks hard." But on a whim I watched S1 and thought "well it didn't start out that way." Kind of the reverse of TNG.

---

That's what I had always thought, until I watched the whole series from the beginning and found that it sucked from the first episode.

Again, this is all opinion, but I think that the interesting parts of ENT far outnumber the interesting parts of VGR. Both had plenty of episodes that represent Trek at rock bottom, though.
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
Agreed MMoM, on both counts.

If this movie fails, I'm not sure that it will be the death of Trek. After all, ENT 'failed' - it was canceled due to low ratings (regardless of those who think the low ratings claim is bogus, the show was, none the less, axed).

But, if the movie does kill off Trek, I think it would be a bitter note to end on. Trek should go out on a high. In my eyes, the only show that pulled that off was TNG.

The DS9 finale was ok, but it was all to convinient - too few people just carried on as before. The show ending was their ending, unlike in TNG (but then, they were making Generations, so I suppose the DS9 wrapping up of all the stories was needed).

The VOY ending was a lame duck - we all knew they were going to get home, and after TNG and DS9, we knew it would take 7 seasons. And the Borg would have something to do with it. The whole thing was just too contrived.
 

---

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
 
Hmm. I think Voyager season 1 was a VERY solid season. And for me season 1 includes the 4 episodes of season 2 that were held over - as I think the videos were released in Australia before the US aired them! I.e. they were in the can but not aired.

Anyway Voyager season 1 is strong. Has some good episodes.

Season 2 started failing with the Kazon arc.

Season 3 was better but this is where they started trading stories and character developement for effects and action.

Season 4 was decent the introduction of 7 of 9 picked things up a little but it wasn't for long -

Season 5, 6 and 7 while OK were't spectacular. Nowhere on Par with TNG and DS9's seasons 5,6 and 7.
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
Well if Star Trek 8 and Star Trek 9 drew low audiences, then as the saying goes, the only people who keep doing the same thing and expect different results are idiots and madmen.

So a reboot was the logical step, or just some fresh new faces.
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
Well, can't argue that new WRITERS wasn't a bad idea, to be sure. But I'm not sure that revisiting Kirk, et all, was a good move at this point. We'll see, I guess, but I'm decidedly iffy.

Of course, I was iffy at the live action Transformers flick too.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
More Fap!

In the second shot you can see the edge of the E's Saucer.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Looks like the black shirt may be a duty uniform after all rather than a fatigue... *grump*
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Well, it could be a "spare" uniform, the type they give to crew whose uniforms are trashed, and are in need of a short-term replacement, or to visitors in need of clothing. Or, maybe it's a take on Kirk's old olive/vomit green wrap shirt.
 

---

Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
 
Well, I reckon they can still replicate/weave/grow a new uniform for the Captain.

It seems like he's wearing the black uniform under that "armored EVA suit" in the new pics. It could simply be that whatever leads him to becoming Captain happens while he's wearing that uniform, and he simply doesn't change during the movie. Putting on the proper gold uniform is then likely going to be a Significant Moment.
 

---

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
 
It seems like the black uni Kirk has on is what everyone has on under their colored tunics. Maybe it's a cadet thing, with the others having already received assignments or something.

Love Uhura's look.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Yep, she's the best thing about this movie.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 

 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Looks like it was influenced a lot by the refit. The engineering hull looks a bit skinny, and I really don't know about the nacelles. The deflector looks like a big parasol sticking out there. I suppose it will grow on me, but at least it's not completely hideous.
 

---

Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
 
That IS Hideous. Did they run out of legos?
 

---

Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
 
Well, I definitely like this much better than some of the assumptions that have been floating around. I was so afraid the nacelles were going to be much more swollen.

Empire Blog has posted an in-depth synopsis of four parts of the movie:

quote:

---

Empire was privileged to be at a world first screening of footage from Star Trek this morning and any reservations we may have harboured over JJ Abrams’ reimagining of the franchise have been well and truly beamed away. What we saw was a medley of action, excitement, humour and a true reverence for the franchise that should both appease fans and suck in newcomers.

Abrams himself appeared to introduce four separate clips from the film, clearly a little apprehensive about airing his footage for the first time and so many months away from its May 2009 release.

“The thing about Star Trek is that I was never really a huge fan. When I was asked to do Star Trek, though, I found myself saying ‘yes’. I just thought it was the right thing. There have been 10 movies and about a million series but when the first series came out I always felt it was someone else’s show. I appreciated there was a promise of adventure but quite frankly that’s always what I felt it was: a promise of adventure. It might have been the resources they had doing a TV show – you know, a big adventure going to a cardboard planet, you know? So, the idea of doing this movie where it could feel legitimate and real despite all the stuff that non-fans might thing was silly, was really the challenge.

“I’ve seen Galaxy Quest, I’ve seen all the parodies but the key to doing this and making it feel real was a great cast. The cast is amazing and I’m going to show you a scene now where we meet Kirk as a young man. This shows how Kirk ends up joining this group called Starfleet.”

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vanguard:
[SNIP]...[SNIP]...complete and utter horse-shit wrapped in a dung-burrito seasoned with flakey poo.

---

quote:

---

But this is one Trek flick I'm not going to bother seeing.

---

That's what you're saying now, but you know that's not true.

When I saw the picture of this ship today, several things went through my mind. Here they are, in order:

1. This is what the Protector would have looked like if the guys who made "Galaxy Quest" had been able to design their ship to look like the movie Enterprise.

2. I was slightly disappointed that this ship has very little in common with the TOS Enterprise, but I got over that pretty quickly. I mean, after already seeing the bridge, I wasn't expecting much anyway.

3. After studying the pic several times, I came to the realization that I don't dislike the design. I certainly like it better than Gabriel Koerner's version. However, I can't say that I absolutely love it either. But Sean is right...like it or not, this is the new Enterprise. And I do have a feeling that it'll grow on me. I remember when I first saw a photo of the Enterprise-D in People Magazine before TNG premiered. Based on the picture I thought the new Enterprise was rather stupid-looking. Well, that attitude changed too.

And I CERTAINLY like it better than the NX-01.
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 

quote:

---

That's what you're saying now, but you know that's not true.

---

To this day, I've never seen Nemesis. At this point, do you really think I will? Why would I go to a movie that, from everything I've heard and seen about it, is targeted to people that hate Star Trek?

If it had been any one single aspect, I could have overlooked it. But this movie has nothing redeeming in my eyes about it. You have 'Gay Magnet' angsty-teen Kirk, 'violently-angry' Spock, Star Fleet Slut Uhura, one of the most rediculous villians made - even including Nemesis... give me a break. I swear that the Trek fans 'looking forward' to this are in denial, or just thankful that it's just not dead quite yet, though they're supporting a product that damn well might kill Trek for good.

And, I thought the Enterprise-D looked like a drunk fish in 1989.. and I still think it looks like a drunk fish.
 

---

Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
 
I would've only been happy with a faithful reproduction of the original, but it's been pretty clear that we weren't going to get that. So, I'm neither shocked or disappointed. It's a ship that sort of resembles Enterprise.

I'm just going to keep telling myself: "IT'S JUST A MOVIE"
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
I'm in a hurry, so I'll just say that ship is fucking horible, and I'm going to cry.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
My immediate response was that it was hideous, but I have a feeling it'll grow on me. At the very least, I'll get used to it. We're gonna be seeing it a hell of a lot.

The thing that pisses me off is that it'd actually look okay if it wasn't for the neck being so far back. I've read that it's supposed to be more structurally sound for it to be attached to the middle of the engineering hull, rather than at one end, but that doesn't mean it looks any good.

I would've preferred a Trials and Tribbleations style aztecing, but at least the detailing resembles some period of Trek's starship history, rather than being completely new. Overall it's a case of "it could have been worse".
 

---

Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vanguard:
To this day, I've never seen Nemesis. At this point, do you really think I will? Why would I go to a movie that, from everything I've heard and seen about it, is targeted to people that hate Star Trek?

---

quote:

---

Is it really so hard to fathom that based on the material presented thus far I absoltely loathe this film?

---

quote:

---

Why would I go to a movie that, from everything I've heard and seen about it, is targeted to people that hate Star Trek?

---

That's where you're wrong. This new movie isn't targeted to people that hate Star Trek. It's targeted to the average viewing audience, most of whom don't even know what Star Trek is or just have a vague recollection of "that guy with the pointed ears and that spaceship with the saucer and long engines."

That's Abrams' point: He's trying to cater to the average audience in an attempt to get new fans interested in Star Trek. He can't cater just to the fanbase that already exists, because that's only a small percentage of the total moviegoing audience. And let's face it...with the possible exception of yourself, every Trek nerd is going to see this movie anyway, so there's no need to cater to us. In order to get Joe Sixpack to shell out ten bucks to see this movie, he needs to make it worth Joe's while. It's simple economics.
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 
The fallacy here is thinking that, no matter what you put in the movie, people who don't care about Star Trek are going to start caring about it at this point. It ain't gonna happen.

Frankly, I'm tired of seeing shitfests made out of so many of my favorite universes in the name of making them more relevent or accessible to larger audiences. Planet Of The Apes, James Bond (my blood boils), Star Wars, etc. It happens in the music world all the time too.

The fact is, there is a healthy proportion of the movie-going public that are just morons. It's all a case of lowering things to the least common denominator. Fuck that. If it's something Joeblow Sixpack likes, chances are I won't. And even if he likes it, he probably doesn't care about it anyway.

Personally, I would rather see someone I loved die than see them live brain damaged on a respirator.

That ship is pointless, BTW. A perfect example of messing with something just to mess with it. Do you really think that someone who thinks the TOS design looks silly is going to think that looks any less silly? Really? You must be joking...
 

---

Posted by Wes (Member # 212) on :
 
Those damn kids and the noise they call music these days!!! GET OFF MY LAWN!!
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
I'm not condoning what Abrams is doing, or trying to stand up for Joe Sixpack Moviegoer. I was simply informing Vanguard that his view was incorrect about the target audience.

And, for a large extent of what you just wrote, Mim, I actually agree with you. But look at it another way. Let's say that because Abrams is catering to the "lowest common denominator," as you say, it causes this movie to make 300 million dollars. That would cause Paramount to green-light more movies, and then possibly a new TV series based on these movies or not. And that's what I'm striving for: a new TV show.

Star Trek IV made a ton of money. Was that due to just the Trekkies who watched it? Doubtful. It was due to the regular moviegoing audience who actually went to see a Star Trek film because they heard good things about it, and that it was actually funny and enjoyable, not because they cared about the intricacies of time travel or how the Bird-of Prey was designed. And guess what happened after that? We got Star Trek: The Next Generation, a new TV show that had nothing to do with the events in The Voyage Home, regardless of whether it was a good movie or not.

See what I'm saying?
 

---

Posted by Starship Freak (Member # 293) on :
 
So, with the focus on the film and apparently on how awful the film and the enterprise is, I was wondering what people are thinking of the shuttle. Now, I know it is very small, but it kind of reminds me of the Argo from Nemesis.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
THOUGHTS...

1. That's fucking ugly. looks more TMP than TOS. In the new state of affairs, will a JJ-TMP look different as well? [-5+]

2. HATE the nacelles (Look mom! I welded HUB CAPS! on the fronts! and then i mounted mud guards! SHINE-y! Must be Piece-of-Shi-it!)[-4]

3. the underside of the primary hull lacks the under-ring dip (hey! they can actually use the space smartly when all the fan-boi fucks think about internal lay-outs.... i.e. a JJ-Saladin COULD be created with little JF-style effort.)[+6]

all said and done, it has elements of almost all the previous Ent's. the only thing i DON'T see is how this design could be drawn from the NX-01 (would help to see the Kelvin fully since they 'claim' it's a class several decades older then JJ-Ent~Nil). Is this design supposed to be what 5 major members of Starfleet could come up with?

*Looks at Trekmovie a few minutes*

one word pops in my head now (WHY?) Perhaps the reason JJ-Ent looks soo different (besides the official shit they say) is financial? royalities and legalities as such (can TOS actors/staff claim any $ from the new film, besides Nimoy, of course?). can anyone? Retcon is here to stay and now we have to try and think how the chicken morphed into the egg...

fuck it. i'm gonna see it regardless...

well, i'll see it... much later, that is (i should be somewhere on Deployment at that time *sigh* )
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Apparently Ryan Church was the designer on this one. He posted this at trekmovie.com:

quote:

---

I’m not going to get involved in the mud slinging, here, but needed to assure you guys and gals: we’ve built you a fine ship. To clarify: there’s a slight optical illusion occurring here, consequence of the “camera” angle. For Rick and others who worry the nacelles don’t have a clear line of sight over the disc — they, in fact, do. We were hardly working in a vacuum. I raided ILM reference photos like a madman. We were deferential to “inviolates” of Star Trek design vocabulary. Additionally, the profile here isn’t 100% representative, because, as you’ve noticed, the Bussards are dimmed. The true profile of the nacelles may or may not be revealed here, and that’s all I’ll say.

---

And the "Rick" he refers to is Rick Sternbach.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Also, I keep forgetting what I've seen on which forums, but did you guys see this profile?
http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showpost.php?p=2579751&postcount=45
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
This was done by Tom Servo over at Trek BBS. I think he based it off of that profile.

http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2281856&postcount=243
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Whoa, those nacelles are friggin long. But then again, so where the nacelles on TOS big E.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I definitely like the shape more from this angle. The recessed neck doesn't look nearly as bad from a side view. I'm not too sure about the look of the neck though. It seems to run the length of the hull instead of cutting off relatively close to the boundary of the saucer. Makes the ship look a bit more compact, me thinks.
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
I dunno.. never going to like a ship whose secondary hull is effectively an erect penis.

(Said largely because it will be impossible for anyone now to get that out of their minds.)
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Penis? To me it looked like a woman who's preggers.

Edit: And who has an umbrella sticking out her naval.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I'd say it looks like a whale...
 

---

Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
 
A quote from Abrams on this website: http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2008/11/star-trek-first.html has him saying, "If you're going to do Star Trek, there are many things you cannot change. The Enterprise is a visual touchstone for so many people. So if you're going to do the Enterprise, it better look like the Enterprise, because otherwise, what are you doing?"

And I'm saying he's a jackass for saying that and then fucking up the Enterprise.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
He was probably referring to the basic shape and not to specific details and nuisances that we associate with the TOS Enterprise. Or he is a jackass like you say.

[ November 12, 2008, 08:24 PM: Message edited by: Mars Needs Women ]
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
To 99.9% of the people in the world, it probably does look like the original Enterprise, and they wouldn't be able to tell if there were any differences. We just happen to associate with the remaining 0.1%.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Here's something

http://trekmovie.com/2008/11/12/big-reaction-to-new-enterprise-new-designer-responds/
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
Yes, I was going to mention that link. One of the images posted there has a view of the new E, but with that awful 2ndary hull replaced by a more-TOS one:



I think it looks a lot better, which leads me to conclude that for me at least it really is the 2ndary hull which is the problem, rather than the nacelles.
 

---

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
 
Yep. All those people that bitched the NX-01 looked too modern are rolling over in their graves.
Hell, they're playing Twister.
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
That secondary hull is going to look great when the ship is turning and rolling, people here simply haven't gotten a chance to get perspective yet, both figuratively and visually.

And I see they finally made an improvement over the original TMP-design I've asked for the past ten years, they inverted the tapering of the pylons so that they are thicker at the base than at the nacelle, so that it doesn't look like the Enterprise is wearing corny bell-bottoms (or crab legs) anymore, which would snap off at the least pressure put on them.

This ship has sexy yet un-Sovereigny curves, exactly the way that LEGO-themed NX-01 abortion didn't.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nim:
That secondary hull is going to look great when the ship is turning and rolling, people here simply haven't gotten a chance to get perspective yet, both figuratively and visually.

And I see they finally made an improvement over the original TMP-design I've asked for the past ten years, they inverted the tapering of the pylons so that they are thicker at the base than at the nacelle, so that it doesn't look like the Enterprise is wearing corny bell-bottoms (or crab legs) anymore, which would snap off at the least pressure put on them.

This ship has sexy yet un-Sovereigny curves, exactly the way that LEGO-themed NX-01 abortion didn't.

---

Nim. as un-original the shape of NX-01 is, for the purpose of old (that includes the notion that ENT retcon's how the ships of Star Trek should look like) it fits. did you think ENT should have been populated by Kubrick looking Dadelus looking ships -or- (forgive me) all those 50's rocket ship designs that Masou Okazaki made in his gallery of Rom War era star trek?

but it's a given that JJ's Star Trek will Polarise the Trekkie Masses into extremes. which given that JJ isn't a trekkie himself, leaves me believing that JJ's laughing his ass off at all our viseral reactions, good and bad, to what teasers we've seen so far. REMEMBER, JJ's famous for bullshit stunts like this. it's angst and GREAT PR! a sure win if you want people to talk about a medium/property so much that they GOT'S to see it!

and by the way, with all these slightly different pics poping up (the so called mod's on that one article in trekmovie site'd earlier this thread, i'm no longer sure which pic is correct? do you mean to tell me that when you power up the JJ-Ent's nacelles, that's when the UPF stripes appear on the nacelles and secondary hull (the 1st pic posted here shows the outline but as grey color - more- intraweb trickery!)?

still have to look at the Kelvin to compare, that's the key, compare how differnent in decades ship designs change in JJ's eyes...

hub caps for bussard collectors, Indeed! at least NX-01 looked believable as a 2nd generation warp ship...

*huggles the Nim to tries to explain the brighter side to Ent and peguin pr0n with the Unreal Excessive pr0n mod*
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 

quote:

---

(spelling errors fixed) Did you think ENT should have been populated by Kubrick looking Daedalus looking ships -or- (forgive me) all those 50's rocket ship designs that Masao Okazaki made in his gallery of Rom War era star trek?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:
Yes, I was going to mention that link. One of the images posted there has a view of the new E, but with that awful 2ndary hull replaced by a more-TOS one:



I think it looks a lot better, which leads me to conclude that for me at least it really is the 2ndary hull which is the problem, rather than the nacelles.

---

As I revealed to you in an earlier post the reason for the nacelles and the support pylons being like this is as i explained before.

EXCLUSIVE NEWS REVEALED !

I work for ILM.

The reason for the nacelles and the support struts is that the nacelles rotate to alter the direction of the impulse engines which are housed inside the nacelles.

In other words the nacelles vector the thrust from the impulse engines.

This is why they are quite solid and much more robust or lumpy at the connecting points to the pylons as this houses the pivot mechanism which rotates the nacelles.

I can reveal that a red shirt will get killed as he tries to repair a stuck pivot mechanism on one of the nacelles.I can even give you a part of the script.

I hope this explains the nacelles and why the saucer is further back,this is to balance the thrust through the center of gravity of the ship thrust and make it look balanced when the nacelles vector the thrust.

I hope this clears the confusion.

If you have any other questions let me know and I will answer them.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Oh god...let's just try to keep this thread open now, shall we? Every time he shows up, the thread gets closed...

Although, strangely enough esecallum, when I originally saw the pic of this ship, I did think of what you had said a few months ago...rotating nacelles...etc.

I still hope it's not the case though...
 

---

Posted by esecallum (Member # 2074) on :
 
It is the case and I have revealed a plot snippet elsewhere to prove it to you that rotating nacelles are an integral part of the story.

People don't understand they had no fancy fields ,etc.

Can you people not see this is why the nacelles at the connecting point to the pylons are so thick and heavy?

This is because they house the clunky pivoting mechanism and the impulse engines too,hence the red glow you can see above.This is why you get the odd micro vent shapes on the nacelles as they allow fine venting control.

I have been mercilessly attacked,vilified,and abused and yet in the face of such unpleasantness I have persevered to help you people.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
You barely have a grasp of good grammar, and you expect us to believe you work for ILM? Thanks for your perseverance to help us, but we really don't need any help, thanks.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
Wait. You actually mean the nacelles house both Impulse propulsion AND the warp coils?

*snicker* to be fair, it's been mostly me that cooks your nuts on a open fire (you make it SOOOOO easy with the materials you post ). As much as we're raging over the Edselprise (Shiny! Shiny hubcaps!) rotating nacelles is...

well, i could see it happening. cynical me could see happening. At that point, that's when i'd walk out of a Star Trek movie. Never could imagine that but since it's happened before (Metallica's St. Anger, anyone?) it could happen again.

Have you watched Macross Frontier, E?
 

---

Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dukhat:

quote:

---

(spelling errors fixed) Did you think ENT should have been populated by Kubrick looking Daedalus looking ships -or- (forgive me) all those 50's rocket ship designs that Masao Okazaki made in his gallery of Rom War era star trek?

---

I, for one, do. Masao's designs show a respect for TOS that ENT and their Akira-based ship never had.

---

My ship designs and the tech behind them are not suited for a planet-of-week TV show. If my ships were used, the shows would spend most of their time flying from star to star. Sort of boring. But there's nothing wrong with "kubrick"-style ships per se. Enterprise would have been better with more realistic tech that was closer to that of our world (rather than 24th century tech)
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
Well, Masao, your designs are based more on a bit of retro-hard-science-fiction approach to Trek, which means that, yes, they WOULD be pretty slow for 'Planet of the Week'...

But, from pure aesthetics, I also prefer your designs to what we're shown from this rather putrid excuse for Star Trek.
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
Bah, preconceived notions, how quaint.

Also, I wouldn't call the nacelle-domes hubcaps, they look much more like those pointy red turn-light cones from classic caddilacs of the '60s. Fits nice in a retro-way, I think.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
There are new images of the Kelvin on the Intel website, although for some reason all I get is the site's footer (even after allowing all permissions on NoScript).

https://boldlygo.intel.com/content/index.html
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 


I actually really like this ship.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Much better angle, too. And I notice that it's got the same parasol-like deflector dish sticking out the front that the Enterprise has.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
Thanks for posting it here, the site still doesn't work for me.

Yeah, it doesn't look so bad. It's certainly consistent with the new Enterprise and any uglyness can be put down to its age. Also, the texturing is really nice and detailed. It looks realistic.
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nim:
Bah, preconceived notions, how quaint.

---

Let's see... we've got trailers out, which I've watched. We've got images of the ships out, which I've seen. We've had script details out, which I've read...

SO, yeah, I'm being totally down with pre-concieved notions here. I mean, really, it's not like I actually know anything about it - particularly not things like how the Enterprise looks, or that Kirk is now younger than Uhura, or that he's an 'angsty rebel without a clue', or was cast to get that pre-teen gay male demographic, etc etc etc...

So, yeah, screw you, Nim.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
I also just noticed that the Kelvin has 3 circles on the bow like the original Enterprise, and it looks like they are definitely not windows in this case.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Airlocks? Docking ports maybe?
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Nah, they're glowing blue around their perimeter. I'm thinking sensors.
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
Vanguard:

quote:

---

- what we're shown from this rather putrid excuse for Star Trek.

/.. So, yeah, screw you, Nim.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by B.J.:
Nah, they're glowing blue around their perimeter. I'm thinking sensors.

---

Honestly I don't see any blue glow. In any case, the site also has another pic of the Kelvin, but in this one the bussard collector is blue.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Well, that's the pic I'm seeing the blue glow in. Between the bussard error and the inconsistencies Timo's spotted, I guess we'll have to wait for the trailer to see what the "final" version has.
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
Nim,

I note you deleted my smiley, indicating that my 'screw you' comment wasn't meant to be taken that seriously or strongly. But, please, do draw a personal battleground between my very strong distate of everything I've seen about the film (which has been very susbstantial) and your apparent slavish devotion to it.

I mean, I attacked what I know of the film, you attacked me personally. Wonder what the difference is here...

So, maybe we should kill one another over it? Swords instead? Pistols at dawn then? Bat'leh? Phasers on 'irritate'?
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Fellas please, no need to fight. We just got to 2 new ship designs in how many years?
 

---

Posted by Starship Freak (Member # 293) on :
 
Yeah, and I agree, I like the Kelvin. This is a good shipdesign in tradition with the Hermes/Saladin-classes from Franz Joseph and the Freedom-class seen in Wolf 359 wreckage scene.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
Yes! One-nacelle ships rule! Fuck you, Gene Roddenberry, and your Starship Design Rules too!!!

Seriously though, I also like the Kelvin. I like the fact that it combines a legitimate TOS feel with something we've never seen before, reflecting the new direction ST is taking. I've also heard from someone who's already seen the new trailer that the new Enterprise looks far better in it than in the still pic we've seen. Like with the Kelvin, I guess angles mean everything.

But man, does that one nacelle look HUGE.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Well its not the size, but the performance that matters.
 

---

Posted by Starship Freak (Member # 293) on :
 
Actually, everytime I see the ship, I want to grab it by the nacelle and flip it. It looks wrong somehow to have the deflector on top and the nacelle below...
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
As boring as this offtopic stuff is...

Van, I don't have a "slavish" devotion to the movie, that's black/white thinking, I got mild enthusiasm. No high expectations, any more than I had for Nemesis or "Cloverfield", so I probably won't be disappointed, like I wasn't with those. I reserve high expectations for movies based on books I like or movies based on some really significant event I relate to.

Those smileys really aren't enough to change your jab to "just messing around", so be responsible. I attacked your remark, not you, I don't think you are a punk and don't want you to talk like one, I wanted you to raise the bar.

I stick to my guns though, the pre-release hype material can be just as misleading in a dissapointing way (Hitchhiker's Guide, Sky Captain, Indiana Jones XVI) as it can be surpassing (Sunshine, Cube, Se7en, in my opinion). So I withhold judgement. Shit, I half-expected McCain to win.

Mars Need Womens:

quote:

---

We just got to 2 new ship designs in how many years?

---

quote:

---

Everytime I see the ship, I want to grab it by the nacelle and flip it. It looks wrong somehow to have the deflector on top and the nacelle below...

---

quote:

---

Seriously though, I also like the Kelvin. I like the fact that it combines a legitimate TOS feel with something we've never seen before,

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Starship Freak:
Actually, everytime I see the ship, I want to grab it by the nacelle and flip it. It looks wrong somehow to have the deflector on top and the nacelle below...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MinutiaeMan:
Also, think of TWOK where the Reliant got flipped by accident...

---

That's the part of the movie (deleted of course) were Khan accidently hits the nacelle-swivel bottom which causes the reliant to skid across space (like they did decades later in the Starkey & Hutch movie)


 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
I know I'm not the only one here who's tried out variations of the essential elements, which resulted in the deflector being above the Bridge. I think it's usually discounted out of some sense of unease over what the deflector actually does. Yet, I was reading Larry Niven's Known Space stories (which feature Bussard Ramjets and also mention that their magnetic fields aren't nice to central nervous systems) long before I ever thought about starship design - but not once did it occur to me to think "and who's to say that having bussard collectors, using who knows what sorts of field technology, are any better to have in close proximity to the Bridge and other parts of the lifesystem?"
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
That nacelle seems to hug the hull pretty closely. That fixes one of the main problems that I have with single nacelle ships like the Saladin. With the nacelle so far away from the saucer, it looks so...fragile, like the nacelle will fall off at any moment, and like any maneuvers, while completely possible for the ship to do, would look weird. I have this image in my mind of the Saladin doing a snap turn, and looking like it's pivoting on it's nacelle...just doesn't look right.

The Kelvin looks like she can do all sorts of maneuvers, and not risk losing the nacelle.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0WNPb8R-40

Just sayin'.
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
Trek (and other TV shows) has always had a split personality, where the TV part gets more liberty, the movie based on the franchise gets a lot more pressure to perform in its shorter timeframe. Ever since the fifth movie, (with the exception of the yawny Insurrection) Trek has had really tough competition each year and have had to improve its thriller/adventure flavor to stay on the radar. This year obviously has tougher competition than ever. Except the Matrix-years, perhaps?

Does anyone else feel like the first movie was the most series-like, thematically?
The third and sixth movies where some of the most popular, I guess, but I wonder how much that had to do with their direct Cold War themes? Besides the tlingons.

Regarding this new movie, we don't yet know the ratio between mobile/action material and dialogue/conference room plotting.
I guess they need to establish a lot of atmosphere politically and ethnically about Starfleet in the early 2200's. Any news on the theme of the movie, are they going for any parallels to real-world politics or events?

And what's the scope on the music? Any specific composer to fill in for Goldsmith?
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Yeah,I love the music in the 2nd trailer.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I believe I read, or saw somewhere, that the scoring is done by Michael Giacchino. I haven't looked him up to see any of his other features, but I remember that he did the music for Disney's Ratatouille last year. Don't know if that's exactly what we want in a Star Trek movie though...
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Yep, apparently he is.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
He also does the music for Lost and Fringe (which to me always sound the same as eachother). I'm not a big fan based on those two, but I'm sure it won't be terrible.
 

---

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
 
So....pop-up phaser turrets?


 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
Looks more like close-in point defense weaponry, like the US Navy's Phalanx-system.
The discharges look too small to be able to reach that humongous entity that is shown several miles away from the ship, maybe they're attacking those robotic torpedoes?
 

---

Posted by Ventriloquists Got Shot (Member # 239) on :
 
AHE ALSO DID MEDAL OF HONOR 1 PSX SYTLE EAT A WATER BOTTLE TO REGAIN YOUR HEALHT

Also, he is pretty secondrate.

(Then again, so is JJ?)

(yeesh)
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
My wife would shoot me if I said this in her presence, but I *JUST NOW* realized that the Kelvin's registry is her birthday (05/14).
*sigh*


.....dammit, I *knew* there was something familiar about that number........
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
She runs a tight ship.
 

---

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
 
You wife was born in May of 1914?
Daaaamn, boy- you likes 'em mature dontcha?
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
*smirks* Oh dear....
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Paramount has released a slightly different version of the trailer, with an additional familiar face:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39238
 

---

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
 
Niiiice. I'm actually getting more excited about it the more I watch it. I'm not having any trouble buying the actors as young Kirk and Spock. And Nimoy looks great. This might be the farthest glimpse ahead into the Next Generation era we've gotten so far, depending on when Spock is from.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Sweet! Old Spock doesn't look too bad.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
The comic tie-in features Picard and Data (or B4?), so he's at least from the post-FC period.

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/merchandise/idwcountdown_b.jpg
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Yeah I was gonna mention that. I might actually buy this comic. IDW has put some good stuff lately.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
I haven't bought any of their other Trek comics, but I'm planning on getting this one just to see how they handle the 24th century time period.
 

---

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
 
Huh... so will it deal with the events in the future that lead Spock and Nero to come back in time (which I'm assuming the movie will only hint at)?

That's pretty cool.
 

---

Posted by Brown_supahero (Member # 83) on :
 
Ha Ha Ha Ha USS Edselprise.....

A yard could get good money changing the hull and frame every 5 years.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
Not to mention toy manufacturers.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Speaking of toys...

The new movie toys are already listed as pre-orders here. No pictures yet though.

Also, it would appear that Uhura and Chekov are only cadets during the movie, going by the product list of 6" figures.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
I gather that Kirk is also a cadet, and they're on the Enterprise on a training cruise under Pike with first officer Spock.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Gee, now that's a connection I never would've made...
 

---

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
 
So, Spock spent an even longer time than Data or Harry Kim without a promotion?

Who's playing Pike?

I can totally see Future Spock saying "BOOP!" to Pike- who, in turn will ask "what all that about?" and old Spock will give that sorta half grin and say "Oh....you'll find out.... fucking human never promoted me...grumble, grumble...".

But more likely, they'll do some sorta "It's good to see you again, sir" and all the fanboys will go "Awwww" because we know Spock really liked his old C.O and it's all tragic and junk.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Pike is played by Bruce Greenwood.
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
And also, old Spock is supposed to be on the "Scotty's exile ice planet", where Kirk ends up for some reason, so Pike and Spock might not meet at all.
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
One-eyed guard: "Nooo one leaves from Terra Hautê!"
 

---

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
 
Do we know why Scotty's exiled on an ice planet yet? Does that mean he's not a member of Starfleet? Just some dude they pick up and make chief engineer?
 

---

Posted by Starship Freak (Member # 293) on :
 
Well, the implications are that he was put on the post as punishment for an unauthorized transporter-accident involving an admiral´s dog, wasn´t it?
 

---

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
 
ahhh... so he's stationed there... not actually exiled. That I'll buy.
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
Yeah, I get that it's something stupid like that.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
It's not just any old admiral, it's "Admiral Archer's prize beagle".
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
Well, we know from that Okudagram he died not long after seeing the proper Enterprise being (or starting to be) built. Perhaps it was the shock of losing his dog that did him in. Scotty killed Archer!
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
I knew I always liked Scotty, and now I know why.
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:
Well, we know from that Okudagram he died not long after seeing the proper Enterprise being (or starting to be) built. Perhaps it was the shock of losing his dog that did him in. Scotty killed Archer!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:
Well, we know from that Okudagram he died not long after seeing the proper Enterprise being (or starting to be) built. Perhaps it was the shock of losing his dog that did him in. Scotty killed Archer!

---

Actually, that paragraph was deleted from the final version of the display that we saw in the episode. Mike Sussman said he wrote it, but they didn't use it. So we don't actually "know" that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wes:

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:
Well, we know from that Okudagram he died not long after seeing the proper Enterprise being (or starting to be) built. Perhaps it was the shock of losing his dog that did him in. Scotty killed Archer!

---

Actually, that paragraph was deleted from the final version of the display that we saw in the episode. Mike Sussman said he wrote it, but they didn't use it. So we don't actually "know" that.

---

Orci considers a lot of the "Star Trek EU" to be canon, so I wouldn't put it past him.

---

To clarify, I wouldn't have any problem with them accepting it, I just wanted to point out that if they did something contradictory it wouldn't be a "real" error.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Majel Rodenberry is the main computer.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Sweeeet!
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
That's a nice nod to established canon. If they hadn't used Rodenberry as the computer voice, then we'd really have to consider this a re-boot.

I seem to remember the computer on the E-nil being male a few times. Do I remember correctly? It's been a while since I've seen the bulk of TOS episodes, so I could very easily be wrong.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
You know, I realized that the only Constitution-class computer she voiced was the Defiant in "In a Mirror, Darkly". The E-nil had several different voices, none of which were Majel. Still, it is nice to have her included.
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 
No, she definitely did the voice of the TOS computer is some episodes.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Damn! If only I'd clicked the "more" under her TOS credits in IMDb....
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Get your shoehorn ready.

http://trekmovie.com/2008/12/11/bob-orci-explains-how-the-new-star-trek-movie-fits-with-trek-canon-and-real-science/
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Well, at least it makes sense...sort of. So, is he disproving the existence of the " Giant Reset Button" that Trek seems to rely on?

And, while I'm thinking about it, does someone want to go ahead and count how many times Orci refers to quantum mechanics as " the most current and awesome scientific theory", or something to that effect. It seems that he found a way to weave that into every answer.
 

---

Posted by Zipacna (Member # 1881) on :
 
Really to me it seems like he's just desperately trying to find a way to justify this being exactly what it is...a reboot. There is one example of this quantum mechanics view of timelines in canon, and 34 examples of "ooo fuck, we've killed our timeline...better go fix it". Like it or not, the concept of a closed timeline is the one that prevails in Trek...and really changing the basis of time meddling in Trek to one based on quantum mechanics, you're invalidating all those previous episodes in my opinion. It just makes them look like idiots for bothering to fix the timeline on all those occassions...why bother, if their timeline would have existed anyway?
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 
Didn't you guys see "Parallels" (TNG)? Or hear of, say, the Mirror Universe? This is not a new concept for Trek.

And OF COURSE it's a device designed to allow them not to be bound strictly by established continuity. But at least it's an explanation. I cannot BELIEVE that there are so many people out there (check out the STXI board on the TrekBBS) saying "I wish they would have just done a reboot without any explanation." I would have HATED that more than Khan hated Kirk. Franchises really need to STOP. DOING. THAT.

And given the stuff we already suspend our disbelief for in Trek, is it really so hard to imagine that different methods of time travel under different circumstances produce different types of scenarios and outcomes? There could be more than one type of timeline split/paradox and more than one way of "handling" them.

Really, there hasn't ever been one overreaching unified theory of time travel employed in Trek. Various writers on various shows have always pretty much done whatever their plot required at the time. Just like warp drive. It really ought to be called plot drive.
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 
Incidentally, this doesn't mean the movie will be good, though. I might still hate it anyway...

I definitely would have preferred a straight prequel, but since it's been fairly clear from the beginning of this project that we wouldn't get one, I consider this to be the next best thing. ANYTHING is better than a fucking remake.
 

---

Posted by Krenim (Member # 22) on :
 
I have only one problem with this "many worlds" explanation.

If the post-Nemesis universe continues to exist after Nero makes his jump through time, why does Spock even bother going after him? After all, from Spock's point of view, Nero simply ceases to exist.
 

---

Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
Well, we'll have to watch and see. Making assumptions based in incomplete information is not logical.

Incidentally, this quantum realities plot devise seams more like a sideways retcon, than an out and out reboot as others seam to think.
 

---

Posted by Zipacna (Member # 1881) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Krenim:
I have only one problem with this "many worlds" explanation.

If the post-Nemesis universe continues to exist after Nero makes his jump through time, why does Spock even bother going after him? After all, from Spock's point of view, Nero simply ceases to exist.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TSN:
However, most of the time in Trek, when we see someone go back in time, the main characters somehow get pulled into the new timeline and can see the changes while still remembering their old timeline.

---

This happens because they are artificially or (super) naturally isolated from the changes in some way, though, right? Guardian of Forever, Borg temporal wake, Orb of Time, insert various plot device here, etc. Otherwise, like in "Yesterday's Enterprise" (TNG), they don't notice the changes.
 

---

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
Like I said, "most of the time". Presumably, for now, we're going to have to figure that Spock follows Nero back in time because of one of the sort of things you mentioned.

[ December 15, 2008, 09:34 AM: Message edited by: TSN ]
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Incidentally, here's the music for the trailer.

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1029950224538
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Too cool.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/dec/16/star-trek-trailer-review

Anna Pickard apparently gets paid by the Guardian to review music videos and film trailers. This is only marginally less annoying than the fact they also pay Sam Wollaston to review TV programs*. Most of the time it's plain she doesn't know what she's on about, so I'm puzzled by her assertion that a Sovvie is visible in the trailer - is this some bit of fan speculation I've missed out on?

*Seriously, the guy is a moron. And his excursions into the SF genre are especially bad. He decided to review the first episode of BSG season 4 on Sky, despite never having watched the show before, and his whole review was largely a routine about how you never see toilets in science fiction in general (and Trek in particular) - this, despite there being a whole, pivotal, scene in a toilet in the very episode he was supposed to be reviewing!
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
It says that the Sovvie appears in at 1:31 of the video embedded within the page. The only thing within that second, besides the clean room white walls of the Enterprise, is Spock's time travel ship. Although, I guess to someone who isn't a die hard fan, and hasn't seen any bit of the last 3 movies could mistake that for a Sovereign, based on the angle it's seen at.
 

---

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
 
Well, we've all seen clips of starships in Trek trailers that do not appear in the movie itself.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
But this is the first I've heard of anyone seeing the Sovvie. Just wishful thinking I'd imagine. When the trailer came out I scoured it frame by frame for little insights, as I'm sure many others did. And we all know a Sovereign when we see one. There just aren't any in that trailer.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
The only other possibility is that someone saw the Enterprise-head-on-view-while-at-warp bit from about 1:32 but there's no question which Enterprise it is, so I doubt it.
 

---

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
Well, we've all seen clips of starships in Trek trailers that do not appear in the movie itself.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:
We know the phaser has some kind of spinning nozzle, dependent on setting in use. I assumed they were incorporating the rotating-barrel motif of the Laser Pistols into the Phaser itself. But this looks more like the nozzle rotates horizontally, around the vertical axis, rather than around the axis of the body of the weapon like the Lasers did.

---

Rightness, I haz it.
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
Heh.. it's Uhura and her two gay cosplay friends!

Not that there's anything wrong with that.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Hmm, I'm not commenting on the dolls, because honestly, I could care less, but on the props...

The tricorder looks nice, as does the communicator, though that looks a bit too much like an iPod ( I notice a theme going here). The phaser looks nice, although I don't see a detachable type I anywhere. At least that's only a minor technical detail that could be easily left out, and all the props actually pretty closely resemble the originals they are supposed to represent.
 

---

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 

"From the looks of the images these dolls are very detailed and have excellent likenesses, especially Pine."

Is there something wrong with this reviewer's eyes? I guess, technically, the Kirk doll's face is slightly less horrifyingly wrong than the Spock one...
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
These are people who look at Barbie dolls for a living, mind. They're bound to have skewed perceptions of normality.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Phaser!!!
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Gentlemen we have created the universe's gayest phaser.
 

---

Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
 
I have to hope that that really -isn't- too close to the prop used in the movie, 'cause that looks rediculous. The one used in TOS, even the Playmates version thereof, was far superior.

But, I guess, that one didn't look like an iPod threw up.
 

---

Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
Wow, phaser set to bling...
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
According to sources cited in the scuttlebutt over at TBBS, the actual prop will have the normal TOS phaser blue colors, with a bit of aged metalic accents. There's a thread over there in the Star Trek XI forum ( scary place, that forum is), that has links to the sources stating this, I believe.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
Not there anymore. Please tell me someone saved the image. . .
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
Of course it'd be on TrekMovie. Hmm. Something in me really hates this spinny-nozzle notion. It must be some shout-out to the different barrels of the laser pistol, but let's face it, that was a pretty nonsensical concept to start with.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Hi-res images of the playmates toys.

I think that the 3 3/4 inch figures look a lot better than the image of the 6 inch Kirk that we say earlier. In fact, the 6 inch figures look better in general than that photo. There's also good images of the Enterprise, the props, and playsets.
 

---

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
For some reason, I'm thinking that I've seen a phaser concept with a horizontal spinny bit a long time ago. Like it was something someone came up with as fan art. I just wish I could remember who/what it was.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
The Superbowl trailer had a few new snippets.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oMTzoW0J1E8&fmt=22

Seems to be being received well by fans and newbies alike.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
So Pike recruits Kirk from a bar. Interesting. My excitement level for this movie just went up a notch.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Nice! Can anyone get a screen shot from the point when Enterprise fires her weapons? They look like TWOK phasers, and seem like the turrets that normally fire to the port and starboard sides are firing forward.

I'm definitely psyched to see this movie, moreso than before.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Big Drill Thingie
http://flareupload.pleh.net/uploads/1505/bigthingie.png

nu-Ent Phasers
http://flareupload.pleh.net/uploads/1505/phasers.png
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
Reminds me of the Wrath of Khan-phasers, the way they cascade out in volleys. That target must be one of those torpedoes from the Narada.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
Big Drill Thingie
http://flareupload.pleh.net/uploads/1505/bigthingie.png

nu-Ent Phasers
http://flareupload.pleh.net/uploads/1505/phasers.png

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aban Rune:
We'll also likely never see the TMP or TNG-era results of this timeline anyway... unless it's in comics. Any other movies made will likely stay in the TOS era.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean:
Fan made Wallpapers of the Enterprise.

The ship looks pretty good in these wallpapers, and the CG work is quie impressive.

---

Ahem.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
This image is an insert in the new TOS DVD packages.. Trekmovie got hold of it, but amusingly they're not sure what DAC is. Prolly a game? Anyway, I wonder if those Starfleet ships will be background ships in the movie, or if they're just made up for this image. They don't look terrible.

I hope not all Romulan ships will look similar to Nero's, though. The main ship fighting the Enterprise here looks fine, but a few similarities with the Romulan ships we're familiar with wouldn't go amiss.

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/STTOS_S1_BRD_Insert_DACGame.jpg
 

---

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
 
Holy shat.

Well, it's not a Dominion or Klingon derivative for once, that ship-building doctrine. I'm liking this Berman/Braga-free production more and more.
Looks like a small Hope class-related ship in the background, being shot at. Or maybe they're small vulcan frigates.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
If those are supposed to be Romulan ships (and Nim is correct in pointing out the newness of the designs as opposed to what we've seen before), then I think that's great. However, the ship in the upper right corner looks too much like the Xindi-insectoid ship, so I'm wondering if these are real movie ships.

There are two other Starfleet ships besides the Enterprise, one with swept-back wings that looks like a spoon, and another, four-nacelled ship.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Yep those are definitely Xindi ships there. Which makes worry since it alludes to the dark hand of Bethesda, whose Star Trek games are about as un-Star Trek as you get. They like dropping the Xindi into their crapfest Trek games. For example, their latest game Star Trek Conquest(not to be confused with Star Trek ConQuest ) contained the Xindi. Now that wouldn't be so bad if only for the fact that Conquest takes place in the 24th Century, and the Xindi are still using their ships from 2 centuries earlier.
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
Well, who'd'a thunk it? They found the last human being on Earth who still thinks that nacelles are rocket engines and therefore should have flames coming out the back, and got him to design the poster. They're really pulling out all the stops, aren't they?
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
The Jellyfish!
 

---

Posted by Josh (Member # 1884) on :
 
Orion slave girls time again, woot
 

---

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
It's funny how Orion slave girls, like freeze-frames of CGI animation, always look worse in still images than they do when in motion.
 

---

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
 
She seems like kind of a big boned girl. And she didn't look green in the trailer. Of course she was under Kirk at the time, so kind of hard to tell.

I LOVE that poster. Hello new wallpaper.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Who knew Kirk was a chubby chaser.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/ritcards/13.jpg

Does this guy remind anyone else of the aliens on the planet the crew found B4 on in Nemesis?
 

---

Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
No. More of a walnut. With eyes.
 

---

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
That girl's body is hot. Face, not so much.
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
I'm more interested in her mind.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
My god! This interview makes less sense than some of the trailers! ( which, now that we have a basic idea of the movie's plot, make some sense)

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/misc/trekxi_shatner.htm

I'm confused now. Some of the interviewie's statements sound like they could have been made by our friend esecallum.
 

---

Posted by Andru (Member # 2145) on :
 
Hmm what date is it today ? (or tomorrow depending of your time zone)
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Sean, just remember one thing: believe everything you're told on April 1st.
 

---

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee:
Well, who'd'a thunk it? They found the last human being on Earth who still thinks that nacelles are rocket engines and therefore should have flames coming out the back, and got him to design the poster. They're really pulling out all the stops, aren't they?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
Sean, just remember one thing: believe everything you're told on April 1st.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
DACraptastic

---

quote:

---

Nim, there's no such thing as a Hope class.
Olympic. Say it with me. O-Lim-Pic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nim:
Jason went:

quote:

---

Nim, there's no such thing as a Hope class.
Olympic. Say it with me. O-Lim-Pic.

---

Hope

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Josh:
Cliche predictions:

- The Enterprise is having technical difficulties out of space dock.

- Kirk makes it with at least 2 chicks.

- A shuttle crashes

- "one more hit" and the ship will be destroyed

- Someone makes a bad Star Trek 4th wall joke.

---

code:

---

  ╒╤╤╕  ╒╤╤╕  ╒╤╤╕┌┐┌┐
┘ ┘┘┘┘┘ ┘┘┘┘┘ ┘┘┘┘┘┘┘┘┘

---

quote:

---

Huh?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by B.J.:
You mean the music that has this pattern (@ ~150bpm)?

code:

---

  ╒╤╤╕  ╒╤╤╕  ╒╤╤╕┌┐┌┐
┘ ┘┘┘┘┘ ┘┘┘┘┘ ┘┘┘┘┘┘┘┘┘

---

Sorry, don't know where it's from either, but I like it!

---

That kinda does sound familiar. Although, it's a somewhat common beat pattern, so it could be from anywhere.
 

---

Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
 
There's a new review over at AICN that seems pretty upbeat about Das REboot HERE.

Let's hope this is as good as this reviewer seems to believe.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
That's one positive review for Star Trek. Love to know what the reference to "Enterprise" is gonna be.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
^Wasn't there an incident with Archer's beagle mentioned a while ago...
 

---

Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
 
Star Trek on "My Space" has posted some additional videos: (Some spoilers)

Video 1

Video 2

They may have added others as well.
 

---

Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
That's one positive review for Star Trek. Love to know what the reference to "Enterprise" is gonna be.

---

I would have put money on a mention of a Commodore T'Pol, but he said it was a deft reference so...I don't have a clue.
 

---

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
 
It'll be a reference to Commodore Porthos.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
On the official movie site it says Scotty was in Admiral Archer's class at the Academy, or something to that effect.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
They also mention the Vulcan High Command.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Whoa Momma.
 

---

Posted by Josh (Member # 1884) on :
 
So Budweiser is still kicking in the future, the Federation met the Cardassians 100 years before TNG. Interesting
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
I don't want to watch the clips, but there are Cardassians? Or are there just aliens that look similar?

Another modern day reference is supposed to be the Beastie Boys playing on the radio in Kirk's Uncle's car. That sort of thing doesn't bother me much, since we hear centuries old music every day.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Uhura orders a Cardassian beverage in a bar scene. But you know what, that doesn't necessarily mean the Feds and Cardies are in contact. Maybe through trade with other species the Federation acquired the drink, even while they have yet to encounter the actual Cardassians.
 

---

Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
 
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Iloja_of_Prim

There we go. A Cardassian in exile on Vulcan, encountered by Tobin Dax. Tobin Dax came before Emony Dax, Emony Dax met McCoy in the 2240s. Ergo, there was at least 1 Cardassian living on Vulcan in the early 23rd century.

I love the Kelvin-era uniform Robau is wearing. Although maybe a bit TNG-y, it certainly looks like it could be a half-way point between the ENT-era jumpsuit and the neo-TOS-era colorful two-piece.

Interesting shots of the shuttle leaving the bay. This Enterprise seems to be quite a larger ship than the original one. And it's filmed from wonderful angles. Yeah.. I think I can learn to live with the new styles, although I do still think that the "design-to-functionality" ratio has been shifted towards design quite considerably.
 

---

Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
Well, they've never specifically said when first contact with the Cardassians was made, people just make the assumption that it was shortly before the border wars. While it's perfectly reasonable that they were in contact long before that point and the war breaking out wasn't because the Federation had suddenly expanded into their territory but because the Cardassian government got ousted by the military and decided to start grabbing territory (like Bajor) to fuel their economic rebuilding.

In fact, that MA article does say the poet was in exile during the "First Republic" and the last time I checked the Cardassians we saw from TNG onwards were certainly not a Republic. For all we know, back then they could have been just another independent "stuck on one planet with a few colonies" races and the aggressive empire building was a relativity new development.
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Mommy, the Star Trek toys are scaring me...

Edit: Also about the Cardassians, wasn't there an episode of Enterprise that featured a reused Cardie space station, albeit with some details removed. Even though this probably wasn't the intent, can't we just now assume it was Cardie station all along.
 

---

Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I am totally going to Burger king just to check when the Enterprise and Kelvin are available. For all we know, that may be the only Kelvin toy released...
 

---

Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
And the only Klingon ship toy released...
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
I hope the Klingon ship is an actual design from the movie (maybe in a deleted scene?) and not just something they made up because the Nerada would've made a crappy toy.

The saucers on the the Enterprise and Kelvin are kind of amusing... I suppose there was nowhere else to put the electronics. Hopefully there will be a Kelvin toy down the line that doesn't look like it's got a b'day cake for a saucer.
 

---

Posted by Blue387 (Member # 2157) on :
 
1. No other Starfleet ships near Earth?
2. Only a few thousand Vulcans offworld? Not the outgoing types, I guess.
3. Nero waited 25 years on the Nerada but apparently has not aged a day.
4. Did Pike crack under the torture? Would have been a nice nod to continuity had they used those slugs from TWOK.
 

---

Posted by Blue387 (Member # 2157) on :
 
And what is it with the Romulans and building massive ships? First the enormous warbirds, then the Scimitar, now the Nerada? Compensating for something?
 

---

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
1. What would it have mattered? Nero would have just destroyed them like he destroyed the ships over Vulcan.

2. The number was around ten thousand.

3. Romulans and Vulcans age at a much slower rate than humans. You ever watch the show?

4. If he did, then that would answer question #1, as there was no Earth defenses stopping Nero's attack.

5. Maybe they realized during TOS that tiny Birds-of-Prey wouldn't be a match for Federation starships, so they got wise.
 

---

Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
I've got a $20 wager with a coworker that someone falls through one of those upright glass panels around the bridge.
Several others have made that prediction now as well.

Easy money.

---