Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
TNG in HD
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: [QB] I don't have my own screencaps handy at the moment to verify, but going by memory I'm pretty sure the graphic in "In The Pale Moonlight" is indeed the one from the [i]DS9 Companion[/i], and that it was only later that it was modified, adding Romulan ships and deleting some of the SF ones. I don't remember if the [i]Cochrane[/i] was among the deletions or not. ([b]EDITED TO ADD: I now see from [b]Spike[/b]'s post above that it was not.[/b]) But I'll leave that aside for a moment. It's one thing to consider a name that wasn't visible in the episode non-canon. (Though silly IMO, since it was surely on the model. Where else would the writers of the [i]TNG Companion[/i] get the name, since it's not specified in the script? I don't believe they uncharacteristically just made it up.) It's a another matter and a step too far to posit that every time stock footage of a ship is re-used, even if the registry [i]is[/i] visible, it must represent the same ship, since there are many cases where this is impossible and it was clearly not the intent. (The same footage of the [i]Hood[/i] from "Encounter At Farpoint" was re-used as many [i]Excelsior[/i] class vessels in TNG, some specified to be other ships and some not. And was every single [i]Akira[/i] we ever saw the same ship? They all had the same registry! There are numerous other [and maybe better] examples as well.) I think excluding what we know from behind-the-scenes sources from consideration is counterproductive, because it's tantamount to a denial of the reality of the situation. There *was* a ship named [i]Cochrane[/i] irrespective of whether that name was seen in the episode(s) as aired, and if we pretend there wasn't because of that technicality, we're simply ignoring the facts. Moreover, if we pretend that it was instead a ship from an episode that hadn't been written/produced yet, we're compounding the problem by adding retrospective speculation and interpolation of intent to the mix. I know I've done my fair share of that in the past, and that it can be part of the fun, and that it's ultimately [i]all[/i] pretend, etc., but I hope my point is taken nonetheless. [/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