Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
$$$ Star Trek Into Darkness Speculation Discussion - Spoilers, natch
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: [QB] As to director involvmen, it varies on the director- Nicholas Meyer did exactly as you say regarding the Reliant- just signed off on it , but with nacelles down instead of up, while Abrams, for example, was VERY hands-on with the look of the Cloverfield monster: I doubt he'd let such a big visual element of a movie just be whatever his art crew came up with...not that we have any idea who really designed that thing. As to Sternach's Voyaher design, you're mistaken- his elegant design was much much different than the final version- he went so far as to make a model of the design, complete with tiny figures to show scale... [QUOTE]http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm106/Linnear1701/Blog%20Photos/VoyagerModel1.jpg[/QUOTE]You can see where Sternbach would take some elements of this design and bring them into his Prometheus design. Really nothing like Voyager- and the first design sketches had this cool sail like part rising from the back of the ship, which was an energy absorber to suck in weapons fire, IIRC. As to the size of the Cloverprise, I can see the VFX guys saying "we need a bigger ship to match the shuttlebay scene", but if taht's the case, they raelly did a halfass job scaling the ship up- windows and docking ports made for a 300 meter long ship just span like two and a half decks at the larger size and remain in the same Probert Refit configuration as the 300 meter ship has. docking ports also make zero sense, unless they're made for giant Zentradi crewmen. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3