posted
Some of you may recall the picture that was supposedly from the trailer, showing the Enterprise in front of the giant saucer wreckage with the name Farragut over Vulcan.
This caused a bit of confusion because the same wreckage in another shot was apparently labelled Mayflower.
Well, I was looking at the blu-ray caps from the film and the name Farragut does not appear on the giant saucer at all. Moreover, the name Mayflower is visible on the saucer in that scene. (Look just above the E's bridge. What's more, it's visible in the first image as well if you look just above the E's secondary hull.
It appears to me that some "clever" person modified the image, probably using the well-known closeup pics of the Nebula-class model circa GEN. As for the source of the hoax, Dukkie said he found it on the TrekBBS back in this thread, but I don't really feel inclined to go trudging through their archives in search of the original culprit. Anyway, just wanted to clear that up.
There of course was a U.S.S. Farragut mentioned in the film, and one of the CGI ships may indeed have been labelled as such, but it wasn't the Mayflower wreckage.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Looking at that first pic, there is something a little too clean about the letters. But still... it's a pretty good job. Except the part where they forgot to get rid of the E from Mayflower...
posted
The funny thing is, when I found that picture over at the TrekBBS, I later looked at it and realized that the placement of the name "Farragut" was off-center to the registry number (in the pic that isn't artificially brightened). I guess I just never bothered to point it out.
I do hope that we eventually see both the renders for the intact ships and the wreckage CG, so we can see if the names match up with the spoken dialogue.
BTW...I can see "162" but I don't know if there's another number before or after that.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Actually, If I had to guess, I'd bet the Mayflower's registry is NCC-1620, since that's the year the real Mayflower arrived in Plymouth.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
It too occurred to me that the name was not aligned to the registry. And the saucer would have to spin very fast from the cap that allows to read parts of the registry to the one with the alleged "Farragut".
Anyway, quite a good hoax that fooled all of us.
But speaking of the registry, I am quite sure it is NCC-1620 (for obvious reasons).
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Teh PW
Self Impossed Exile (This Space for rent)
Member # 1203
posted
in the screen caps of pre-destroyed ships, are the hull numbers visable at all? even with resolution increases? what about looking at the shuttles? any chance of linking shuttle-to-ships? (i mean, if they took the time to pump that scene in Naranda with teasers...?)
and does someone have the link to the the little Jason-like models someone made of those ships? i'm pretty sure i have em on my old laptop, but ive not updated my Portable HD or the new laptop...
and im sick. poopy sick. dehydrated sick. Weeeeeee *cough* flu *goes back to bed, gotta love getting a SIQ chit on a duty day*)
posted
I'm a little iffy about saying the registry is NCC-1620 just based on the idea that it could be an in-joke. We can't see the fourth digit, so we can't say what it is. Can we even say for sure that the fourth digit follows 162 rather than precedes it?
And Bernd, so long as we're on the subject of correcting STXI ship errors, there was no U.S.S. Centaurus. Someone mis-heard U.S.S. Antares, there.
Also, while it perhaps can't be taken without a grain of salt, according to this concept art, the Newton belongs to the class with the underslung double hulls and the Defiant to the class with none. (I say take it with a grain of salt because the latter design doesn't exactly match anything in the film, apparently having been revised to create two separate designs, one with a rollbar and underslung hull and one with no rollbar or underslung hull.)
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
You may be iffy, but I'm not, because it makes perfect sense. So what if you can't see the fourth digit...why would a ship be labeled the "Mayflower" and have a registry of NCC-162(0) if it wasn't an in-joke? Do we honestly need JJ Abrams to send us a personal memo stating this before we can believe it? I think not. I mean, c'mon, the Kelvin was named after the guy's grandfather for crying out loud. I wouldn't be surprised if the 0514 registry is his gramp's birthday.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I have Centaurus on the notes I took myself. Well, IIRC I made these notes watching the German dubbed movie version, but I didn't think they would change ship names. Maybe I was mistaken?
Regarding the Mayflower, I can read "*-162*", followed by something that could be a "6", "8" or most obviously a "0".
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The trailing 's' sound from U.S.S. blends with the name to make it sound like that, but I'm pretty sure the name is Antares. Don't feel bad, though, you're not the only one who thought it sounded like Centaurus.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
