quote:- what we're shown from this rather putrid excuse for Star Trek.
/.. So, yeah, screw you, Nim.
My comment of "preconceived notion" was aimed at your repeated and strong-worded criticism about the ship and the unfaithfulness to Trek, before having seen the movie and any full, coherent scenes. The "gay male demographic"- and "angsty rebel"-comments only confirm it.
While you're of course entitled to it (and don't get me wrong, I don't give a rats ass about your personal opinions of the ship design), I felt I've wanted to balance out your worst thread-smears with a benefit of the doubt, since I'm looking forward to seeing this design and the movie.
But damn, that last comment of yours was really awful, makes you sound like a bratty little punk, not some 37-year old dad. Shame on you. Wonder if that is part of the plan in the elaborate "Off-pissing" scheme JJ Abrams is supposedly plotting, according to Pensive. Making grown men younger!
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
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.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
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
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.
-------------------- "The Starships of the Federation are the physical, tangible manifestations of Humanity´s stubborn insistence that life does indeed mean something." Spock to Leonard McCoy in "Final Frontier"
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
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...
-------------------- "The Starships of the Federation are the physical, tangible manifestations of Humanity´s stubborn insistence that life does indeed mean something." Spock to Leonard McCoy in "Final Frontier"
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
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?
Thank you. Saves me from quoting the Eric Idle-song and bringing out the guitar.
Starship "Exceptional Person":
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...
Yes me too. The closest we've come before I guess is the Intrepid, with a deflector in nose-level?
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
If I'm allowed to speculate (maybe this has already been said, not sure), I think the major reason for flipping would be that otherwise it would look just like the Enterprise but simply sans a nacelle, too boring when put next to eachother.
Movie designers do sneaky stuff like that often, I notice. In LOTR, Gandalf's and Saruman's actors got huge nose-prostheses, not to look funny but because otherwise the large hair and hats would make their faces small like little prunes under all those accessories.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
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,
The Kelvin is ALMOST good to me. It's just got some details (such as the pop-up turrets, and the lettering) that I don't like. It's definately a salvagable ship, and I do like it a LOT more than the Enterprise.
posted
Also, think of TWOK where the Reliant got flipped by accident...
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic