quote:Originally posted by TheF0rce: All the details on this ship makes the original TOS enterprise looks like a cheap model{which is what it was]
They probably would have been better off if they stuck to looking like the constitution or daedeulus class...or even the botany bay---hey its the right era.
But, whatever i'm going into the new series having already cleared my mind of everything from TOS---just pretend TOS never happened and you be fine integrating this new show.
You better be kidding with that. TOS was the one that started this whole universe that we all love. We can't just ignore it because damn Rick and Brannon seem to want to. About that cheap model comment. That was no cheap model when it was made. You have to remember that back then TOS was using the some of the best special effects.
posted
No I of course don't want a 'middle finger' shown to TOS, but this only a possibility which I alluded to that may be happening, or end up happening with Enterprise.
I said this in another post/thread, and I'll repeat it here: What if they used the hull of the Galaxy Class and stuck a couple of Phoenix nacelles on it. Would eveyone then say, "hey, it's fine, it fits in okay with the 22nd century?" Surely there'd be a similar uproar....
Seigfried: "..What we have seen in Star Trek is NOT a representative sample of the Trek universe.."
?? What do you mean exactly by that??
Don't get me worng, a little while a ago I was defending 'Enterprise', and advocating that people at least give it a chance. My complaint here Seigfried, is that certain properties of Star Trek (i hate to say this word) 'canon', have been compromised. My fear is that it may get worse, and end up devaluing TOS, and the rest of the 'time-line' that is to follow.
If you have a problem with my personal opinion Seigfried, which obviously you seem to have, then I am perfectly happy and relaxed about it, for we all have our opinions. This is one such function in a forum. We discuss and debate things. But I am entitled to offer constructive critisism if I see fit. I have not been crude, vulger, or have launched into any personal attacks on any other forum member. So please do not attack me for airing my concerns, disappointments or opinions.
-------------------- "To the Enterprise and the Stargazer. Old girlfriends we'll never meet again." - Scotty
posted
" What if they used the hull of the Galaxy Class and stuck a couple of Phoenix nacelles on it."
This is an invalid argument. The hull of the Enterprise is very different from the Akira's, especially as far as the details go. If you maintain that they're the same, few people will regard your statements as rational.
posted
We do not know everything that is going on in the Star Trek universe. We simply cannot. We have a collection of stories about a set group of characters and how their life goes and, occassionally, how it intertwines in the affairs of the galaxy. The Original Series focuses on a ship named Enterprise. We never ever saw another ship of Starfleet with a class that differed from the Constitution class. Does that mean Starfleet had no other classes? Clearly, it does not. We just never got to see any other classes simply because the series focused on one particular ship and crew. All the following series have been much the same. What we see presented in Star Trek is not a representative sample of what is occurring in that universe. If it were, then no body would ever have to go to the bathroom because we've never seen it done.
It is not your opinions that are my concern, Red Admiral. You have the right to your opinions, I have the right to mine. This forum is serving as a means to aired our differences. But, you do not seem to be reading anything other than what you and the people who hate the new ship are writing. You keep posting on and on about Starfleet in this new series. I and other have explained that canonically, Starfleet was never said to have come into existence in 2161. On top of that, this series could focus on the almost exclusively human Earth Starfleet that later is modified extensively to be the Federation Starfleet. Add to that, in several of your posts you down to the argument that Berman and Braga are not going to be happy until The Original Series is completely erased and Star Trek is a mere shadow of what it once was. You have no basis for your claims, and yet you are making this a prime reason for supporting your statements. THAT is what is bugging me.
posted
I like it. It looks good. Little bit country, and a little bit rock and roll. OK, who's going to make a 3D model of it?
-------------------- "Nah. The 9th chevron is for changing the ringtone from "grindy-grindy chonk-chonk" to the theme tune to dallas." -Reverend42
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Seigfried, I will categorically announce to you right now that I have never stated that I believe 'Berman and Braga are not going to be happy until TOS is erased or destroyed."
I never said that or implied it, nor do I believe it one iota. My concerns are based on carelessness on their part in trying to maintain, FAITHFULLY what Roddenberry started. A wonderful job was done with DS9 and to a lesser extent Voyager in upholding the ideologogy and original vision. Yes it remains to be seen what sort of job they do with it overall. Okay, call me a bit of a pessimist and a worrier, I'll agree with you! Lol.
But don't make sweeping statements about me and my standpoints on just about everything I say. I believe the only things I've posted on this particular subject is A) I don't the Akira - am I in the minority here, no. B) I don't have complete trust and faith in Braga and Berman, and C) a couple of gripes about certain facts like Qo'Nos in 4 days which many have also gone on about.
And I read every post with interest as well. But I just do not agree with those that defend the Akiraprise when saying the nacelles are a bit smaller than the Akira, the deflector dish is in another place, blah blah. To be frank, so what. As Treknophyle says in his thread, us fanboys loved the Akira, so they just used it for the Enterprise because of its popularity. It was just damn lazy that no serious creative thought was given to what sort of shape and general design theme would be sensible and consistent.
[ July 10, 2001: Message edited by: The Red Admiral ]
-------------------- "To the Enterprise and the Stargazer. Old girlfriends we'll never meet again." - Scotty
quote:Originally posted by Ryan McReynolds: Strange, I find that the details make this ship look more primitive and less refined than the smoothness of TOS-era perfection.
Amen! Now that we can see it up close it's very similar to what I was imagining. Unlike the smooth lines of the E-nil or Excelsior, or the curvaceous lines of the E-D, it's clunkly and greebly. Compare the look against some of those in the Spaceflight Chronology - plates, hatches, seams, grooves, widgets, and just a hint of what's to come.
quote:Originally posted by The Red Admiral: I said this in another post/thread, and I'll repeat it here: What if they used the hull of the Galaxy Class and stuck a couple of Phoenix nacelles on it. Would eveyone then say, "hey, it's fine, it fits in okay with the 22nd century?" Surely there'd be a similar uproar....
If they took a (TOS-era) Constitution-class saucer, glued some Constitution-class nacelles on short pylons below the saucer, then plunked a Constitution-esque secondary hull directly below the saucer, would you claim they were ripping off the Nebula-class and that it only belongs in the 23rd Century?
IMHO, it would be perfectly valid to expect an Ambassador-tech Nebula-style ship, an Excelsior-tech Nebula-style ship (e.g. the Curry), or a Constitution-tech Nebula-style ship.
How about a pre-Constitution-tech Nebula-style ship?
Okay, then how about a pre-Constitution-tech Akira-style ship?
Even if the NX-01 closely resembled the overall structure of the Akira (which it's clear now it doesn't, except for the catamaran), it would be perfectly acceptable - IMHO - as long as the details matched the era.
posted
It's not so much a thing about technicalities, it's about the feeling. Just look at it. Does it look to you like a 22nd century ship? If you had no idea it was the ship theuy were using for ENT, would you place it as being tech from 100 years before TOS?
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
crobato
Ex-Member
posted
LoL.
Copying the titular starship? Copying a theme or a format is one thing; copying a design is another.
A plane with a cockpit, fuselage, two wings, a rudder and two elevators. That's a theme. A car that is a box with four wheels on each side. That's a theme.
But a BMW M5 in the sixties is another, or an F16 in the fifties.
Ships in the 24th century are only loosely based from the TOS ship. They only follow a general theme. The Akira itself is based on the Miranda theme, which in turn can be loosely based on the Ptolemy class theme by Franz Josef.
The Constitution A looks more different from the original Constitution than this ship is to the Akira.
I don't care if it looks cool or not. The originality is the issue. The survival of this series is not about being cool or not, but whether they can be original. Apparently this is so lacking---more proof to the creative bankuptcy of the Berman-Braga team. If they are trying to win over you by being "cool", they are trying to win over you on a more debased instinct since they know they can't win over you on your higher brain functions by being truly creative.
posted
crobato: This ship closer to Akira than Connie to Connie-refit? Riiiight. And you're basing this staggering conclusion off a single top-view? For fuck's sakes, put an overhead view of an Oberth and an Olympic side-by-side and tell me what you see.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
crobato
Ex-Member
posted
Making your usual apologies and spins, Tom? Is asking for more originality too hard to ask? There is enough three dimensional detail to see it. By the way, bend over and let Braga do the shoving right up your apologetic ass.
posted
I won't dignify this with a response, but I will say I have a new sig.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
crobato
Ex-Member
posted
You don't have any dignity at all, Tom. What absurd logic is this? Are you going to expect that the Enterprise has a big Jay Leno chin underneath the saucer? If you look at the face of a man, do you need to see the back of his head to judge his looks?
It is so incredible how you can make a rhetorical spin on it---"don't judge it until you see the bottom." Aw Pleez. A saucer is a saucer. What do you expect?
It still looks too advanced for god's sakes. Even the changes in the Enterprise saucer section that differs from the Akira, such as the chin gap, harks to ships like the Steamrunner, another Jaeger design. I wonder how ILM and Alex Jaeger is feeling about this right now.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
