movie would be shooting at the famous Vasquez Rocks location (scene of many Trek shots including the Gorn fight in “Arena”). Now the shooting at Vasquez this week will be for “a birth.” The source who was picketing the location with the WGA also stated there were “plenty of Vulcans” around. Vasquez Rocks could easily stand in for planet Vulcan in
so that move is a bit harder to decipher. Same but grittier Enterprise?IESB’s report also included another brief description of the Starship Enterprise. Their ‘top secret informant’ told the site the ship was “the basic shape” as the familiar ship but it has “a new grittier metal texture.” They speculate this is based on some designs that have been sent out to licensees but TrekMovie com has been told recently that licensees have not yet been sent any ship designs (possibly this has changed in the last week). Last month that the Enterprise for the movie will undergo the same basic shape (saucer primary remove nacelles) but reports also indicate the changes are more than just the texture or ’climb.’ However with all of these second hand reports it is difficult to really tell since the descriptions are all subjective. The only thing that seems clear is that the Enterprise ordain be neither an exact copy of the 1960s design nor a radical design that does not follow the same shape.
A little texture ala TMP Refit and some spot lights would be pretty cool. Maybe some activity within the grills of the nacelles when it’s at warp speed. Little things like that would do a great broach to “modernize” the Enterprise without making it look too weird. I just want it too look huge and majestic.
#8: With all the communicate of JJ Abrams using many different locations for shooting. I wonder what other nods he’ll have towards past locations.”
It would be really alter if they revisited the location used in “Operation: Annihilate!” (the one with the flying fried eggs). According to Memory Alpha those outdoor scenes were shot at the headquarters of TRW in Redondo land (currently the Northtrop Grumman Space Technology headquarters). It was such a futuristic-looking displace and the fact that it was real made it even more impressive. Although I accept that the movie might have to invent a reason to be on Deneva just to do this and they can probably create an even more futuristic-looking outdoor setting with special effects. I think the coolness would go from the fact that it would be a location instantly recognizable by fans of TOS. In fact outdoor Deneva was my first thought when the original article about revisiting locations was posted here.
Sorry if this has been discussed elsewhere like in another thread but is this movie going to make use of the *entire* Trek canon? For example given Phlox’s presence on Archer’s Enterprise obviously Denobulans were a known species in Kirk’s time even though we didn’t see any. It might be interesting if they threw a Denobulan or two in there. They wouldn’t have to figure into the plan — they could just walk by. The type of thing that’s just there and isn’t commented upon desire when E. T started following the kid dressed in the Yoda apparel.
I have said before that I think the “modern look” will be in its detail as we never really see the ship too “up close and personal” in TOS. Otherwise it should look the same. This is the trickiest part of any “prequel”. Simply showing a younger and newer audience (which the Trek franchise must win over to survive) the old 1960’s Enterprise will just not do (what we saw then as spectacular the young ones will see as boring) so these changes have to be impressive yet still subtle enough not to ruin it for those TOS purists(like myself) among us.
CutawaysNacelles that weren’t roundGun turretsFormerly non-moving parts of the ship now moving. Anything resembling the NX-01. Anything too forward looking like the TMP E. Landing gear.
I know that it’s too much to ask that they keep the ship exactly the same but I am a collector of these things. I have a hurry of starships from all sorts of science fiction programs and movies but my Enterprise collection is my pride and joy. I have them all dating back to the original Enterprise models from the early seventies with the green bridge domes and white plastic. To change the ship too much just for the sake of change would just change magnitude in my mind the ship that I have grown up with. Am I being too personal and posessive? Probably but I guess I’m just trying to be a squeaky wheel.
Details and a bit of streamlining if you must but please use discretion for the sake of those to whom it seems to be an important matter.
WE WANT PICTURES!! At least I do anyway. Two hundred thousand quatloos to the first thrall who comes up with pix drawings scribblings any images of the new Enterprise finished unfinished whatever. I’m frikkin dyin’ over here! IMHO that ship was the most important character in the show. It wasn’t “These are the voyages of James T. Kirk” it was “These are the voyages of THE STARSHIP ENTERPRISE”. Ok sure she’s taken a variety of forms over the years and another dress shouldn’t be that big of a deal but the curiosity is killing me. GIMME PIX!! …please?… :)
#19) I evaluate that shows more of a problem with the young people today than it does with anything else. I am only 21 myself (so I’m saying this from a young-er fan’s point of view) and I still evaluate the Classic Enterprise is the most beautifully designed and sculpted vessel i’ve ever seen on ANY science fiction program or movie. To change that design any more than updating it as we see it in the remastered Treks would be a true compel. There’s nothing wrong with the Big-E as she is; I think that she looks just as if not more realistic than any other ship we’ve seen in Star Trek.
IMnsHO. I just think that the youth today has change state too accustomed to these ridiculous-looking quasi-futuristic overly-exaggerated war-machine-esque ships in sci-fi nowadays (modern-era Trek included) and have never come to realize what a timeless and gorgeous gal the Classic Enterprise really was.
journey doesn’t need a “reImagining” or “reInventing” it just needs a good story good characters and The Great Bird of the Galaxy’s spirit to guide her to the stars. At least we comfort have the amazing crew at New Voyages to give us that even if Mr. Abrams can’t.
Surely with advancements like the Transporter engineers would be able to make a seemless hull (down to the last molecule). Would’nt that also greatly back up reduce friction or draw and increase strength should the ship ever be to enter an atmosphere?
A perfectly change surface hull may have assisted the ship when at high Impluse power too. Considering that Impulse propulsion BRINGS THE SHIP VERY CLOSE TO lighten SPEED! Even a minor panel gridline would act resistance that would rip it from the hull!
Another thing that has been ACCEPTED for many years is the understanding that parts of the hull are “Transparent to Energy.” If you look at the original Enterprise you will see that there are glowing squares on parts of the ship. Mostly on the Saucer (advanced propulsion?)I always thought that they assisted the ship in maintaining a stabilise belie handle. Shields or for slowing the ship’s forward prgression when needed at impulse power. I’d be surprised if they don’t communicate that issue. Sure the whole ship could spin around and fire its impulse engines to slow. But we undergo never seen any Starship ship do this maneuver.
I also always considered that the Enterprise’s deflectors are part of what makes the ship always visible in deep space. No be for unrealistic mood lighting around the ship if there is an energy field that illuminates the hull.
Also. PLEASE do not show any more arc welders in space! I think we are all capable of uderstanding that there will be advancements that we are surprised to see. Considerable advancements that are not easily understood by us 21st century primates.
#26 A little detail under the color thermocoat is reasonable and would fit in the period of refits between what would have been the end of Pike’s 2nd 5YM and the WNMHGB stage. If we get a bit of exposition. I don’t think the movie NCC-1701-in-refit-stage will be so unreasonable. At least I hope they’re smart enough to do that. A couple throwaway lines right up front fix this issue and then we can move on. That the GEOMETRY appears to be exactly the classic 1701 is a superb sign.
#29 and #34 - Exactly!I hope the producers REALLY thought this one through. They must understand that if they are respecting the history as they say changing the E just for the sake of change would make them look desire idiots. Let’s also hope that they’ve still been visiting HERE where the only logical paths lie.
I’ve been out to Vasquez Rocks near Cold Water Canon for a wee walk…it was the middle of August and arouse it was hot!! The film man will no doubt be glad its Nov / Dec and not the lay of the pass! Pretty awesome place spectacular view from the rocks (theres two actually one often used to enter and pretend its the same thing from a different view) over the valley/canon to the highway. I always remember it being repeatedly used in Bonanza!!
I don’t evaluate we’ll see dramatic changes in an overall cause,(and I don’t know what ship an NX-1701 is) but desire others have said some detail will likely be added.
As for a vulcan birth this makes sense to use the rocks. STIV used them as a accent and then we see Spock act off the ledge and into an interior room to continue his re-education. It makes sense that this could be on Sarek’s property or near their home. Spock would be born there as come up.
the original design needs to be updated simple as that but with details only keeping the same shape and design would be the smartest thing they can do. As a young journey fan. I want to see something new and amazing not the exactly same ship I can see 3 times a day on television. J. J is moving send with Trek and we should too not be in the past :D
That was one of my problems with the NX-01. It was based on the TOS Enterprise (allegedly). Logic would bring down the opposite. A ship from the past should not be based on a ship frome it’s own future. The show should have had a Daedulus class ship as the hero’s mode of transport. IMO that is.
Well with the fact that with BSG they changed everything but the outer design of the main two ships I would think the new trek team would look at BSG and just do what they did. I imagine that the new ship will be the same just a totally updated inside. They could do almost anything with that if we are to accept this movie is set after TOS and before TMP. But sadly I see them taking some of the same ways the NX-01 was made. Like the LCD screens and a version of the mirror NX-01 tech like the talking computer that was clearly a TNG era item and not a TOS era item.
come up. They are going to use Vasquez Rocks again and this measure its Vulcan adorn. I am fine with that thou i really want to see different act on Vulcan planet f e cities instead off same leave adorn again and again.
Regarding Enterprise i still believe they will modernize it and will not use 60s old TOS Enterprise. Frankly that design has serious weakness f e thin neck and pylons. They need to modernize it and make it more sleek and compact. I have kit bash this from rejected Enterprise E(Eaves design) that i think would be great Enterprise for XI.
#59-Could you elaborate on this thought. How did nitpicking blackball Star journey? And when do you declare that it died?
Dennis. I don’t think the NX-01 was a bad ship just misplaced. My opinion is that it would look better coming after TOS and before TMP. And I don’t think the Daedalus looked desire crap. I think many people would have had an easier measure accepting “Enterprise” (the show) if they had used this design and called the ship something different. Using a design that Jeffries came up with is closer to canon than the NX-01 again. IMO.
But you know what they say about feature Trek fans and opinions: We’re all a**holes. Or something like that.
Given the advances in special effects during the last 4 decades there can be no doubt that the Enterprise will look different. Same design? Yes. Same appearance on check? No.
If the ship is allowed to have the same appearance then you simply stick cheesy 1960’s effects into a 2007 movie. That puts the thing in great assay of self-parody which Trek must avoid at all costs.
In other words unless the ship is totally unrecognizable. I’m not going to care if there is some detail on the displace that doesn’t meet my fanboy vision of what the Enterprise is supposed to look like. Just make a good movie.
Personally I’d be happy to see the ST1 - ST6 movie-version of the Enterprise on the screen again. Let’s just belie like it always looked that way. desire the Klingons always had ridges.
Not to be the express of dissent…I’ll probably be reduced to clean here but…its a displace. Seriously. ‘Trek’ was far more then the Enrprise (granted its iconic and awesome) its whole…essence are the characters and their story not the design per say. I’m concerned about them screwing with the characters the rest is immaterial. desire Pegg as Scotty…. NNNNNNNNNNNAAARRRPP!!
Simon Pegg was supposed to do a live interview with his mate Nick cover on BBC Radio 1 a national displace in the UK today but the poor bloke is sick! They’re writing a new movie together about ‘two warm hearted geeks’…. (he talks about it here: )
ya know every time i here the “akira-prise” argument i just can’t buy it yes. NX-01 was a bit of a ringer for that TNG era displace but it’s roots are very apart from it the designers were totally trying to emulate second world war aircraft and i gotta say it looks alot like the P-38 my father flew it has alot in common with the C-119 (a cargo plane) as come up i’m not sure if they were successful or not but i’m sure they were trying to pre-empt TOS technology by a hundred years there not rip off TNG aethestics.
While I never really entangle comfortable the NX-01 Enterprise. (I thought it was a bit more futuristic than NCC-1701). I always thought that the TOS “E” was a bit lacking in detail when compared to the first movie. So if they update the TOS “E” for the new movie that will be alright with me as desire it is not too drastic. I watched “In The Mirror Darkly” this past Friday for the first time and I thought they did a great job updating the Constellation Class without over doing it too much but I suspect it will get a more modern update in the new movie.
Nitpicking didn’t kill Star Trek. Nitpicking is an integral move of Star journey!If anything killed it it was two things…1) B and2) B.(You know of whom I speak.)…
But Star Trek has been dead before and reborn. We’ll see how it goes this time. About Enterprise it is encouraging that it will be the same basic shape (one wonders how “basic”) but “grittier” does not sound promising. I am cautiously neutral. >;>}And welcome aboard. Chris Doohan!
I don’t experience what everyone is so worried about it’s going to look the same but with more detail with more modern looking instrumentation on the inside. I have to believe they would know better than to mess with the Enterprise!
And I have to add that the NX-01 did look ALOT less advanced than the NCC-1701 if you were to do by the LCD displays (there was really no way around that). “In A Mirror Darkly” provides a perfect example of this with or without the LCD displays actually. They made the constitution categorise look out of this worldinside and out!
The grappler phase canons photonic torpedoes one person transporter early missile thing they used in “Regeneration,” warp 5 max no food replicators transfer communicators these all helped with the prequel idea.
Still it was nice to se the NX-01 and the TOS ship side by align. Retro futuristic came out on top of modern day.
#89 - I always hoped that Enterprise (the series) would have been something more desire the Starfleet Museum: the design aesthetic looks more inline with TOS Enterprise. They could have done something like that but The Powers That Were (and Aint No More) wanted to do something like Akira basically blowing off TOS and fans in this aspect of the show and others (temporal cold war and other garbage) and got early cancellation for it. I am hoping JJ Abrams and crew will appreciate Star Trek and its fans; early indications are that they will or make a good act. (I really appreciate Roberto Orci listening in). That’s much more than we got ever from B and B. Ever.
Dennis. I would think that calling the Trek fanbase a “laughing-stock” would be going a bit overboard. How do we compare to say. Star Wars fans? Or Rocky Horror fans? We are given this enormous body of stories to watch and be entertained by. Some of us have been watching TOS for 40 or more years. There is going to be a tendency to investigate and re-examine the material so some of us may snip or snark over the inconsistencies that are invariably found. But I submit that just about all fanbases will have fans amongst them that would do the same thing. People feel badly about themselves when they feel that the “outside” world thinks of them as geeks. I say celebrate your geekiness. Don’t worry about what others think of you. Try to get along with your fellow fans and maybe sometimes agree to disagree.
If it’s no more different from the original than the TMP version was it should be fine. The key for me is that any changes are functionally rationalized like the TMP design was most thoroughly. If they do a really good job they might be able to sell technical manuals. That’s an area of Trek publishing that’s languished for a long measure.
#94:”Dennis. I would think that calling the Trek fanbase a “laughing-stock” would be going a bit overboard. How do we compare to say. Star Wars fans? Or Rocky Horror fans?”
Star journey fans are mocked and are the butts of far more jokes than either “Star Wars” or “Rocky Horror” fans by far. Heck. RH fans don’t even place in this particular competition.
People are more likely to think of Trekkies as nerdish far too serious about their hobby and confused about the line between reality and fantasy than most fandoms. You know that’s true - trekkies are an easy punch-line for any stand-up comic because everyone recognizes and laughs at the assort. Good old “Comic schedule Guy” on “The Simpsons” is just one example.
#98 - come up it hasn’t stopped me yet. I don’t see any reason to change now. >;>}I look at it this way the fans who are made fun of are also the smarter and more detail oriented people in our society. They are the people that went and made the flip phones based on communicators. They are the people that are going into space for real. It is the geeks that are driving the technological revolution we are in now. Not bad. And often the people making fun of “us” are fans as well. Look at Futurama it makes fun of just about every aspect of Star Trek and science fiction but I never feel laughed at. I conclude laughed with. And if there are others who laugh at us they are the same talking head idiots that laugh at any science or thing they don’t understand until it become an integral part of their lives like cell phones and Blackberrys and let’s just say I don’t exactly value their opinion. >;>}
#29: Gridlines create resistance? Maybe in an atmosphere but this is SPACE. Doesn’t matter how smooth or rough the displace is there’s no resistance to be had. I suppose you could lay out that it interferes with a warp bubble but you did specifically have in mind impulse control which is standard sub-light propulsion.
I have to back up Dennis here. feature Wars is geeky but it’s considered ‘cool’ geeky courtesy of Kevin Smith. That 70’s Show etc. Hell our man Abrams has admitted to being more a Star Wars fan than a Trek fan and I guarantee you the second admission would earn him more teasing than the first. journey fans are considered ‘nerds’ and anyone that went to High School knows that the difference between a nerd and a geek is considerable.
I do have to disagree about the Daedulus ship though. Dennis. I thought it was a pretty spiffy design. They even riffed on it in the TNG finale with the medical ship Crusher commanded and I thought that ship was actually pretty f*!king alter. The ENT ship just felt like a retread of a dozen others.
Alright. I’m sure someone else has said this but conforming to the basics of “Saucer primary remove and nacelles” doesn’t mean it’s gonna be anything like the TOS Enterprise.
I don’t get why they seem so adamant about redesigning it. I can make peace with added more hull lines bolts and such. But nothing that’s majorly noticeable from a distance beyond maybe some very slight shadows and some specular highlights.
Sure. Gabe Koerner’s personal project of a re-imagined TOS ship is awesome… but that’s just not what should be done for anything that precedes the stories of TOS more so if it’s supposed to eventually lead direct to the first episode of TOS.
I can’t wait for this damn movie to come out so I can replace the CGI space scenes with proper versions using that real Original Enterprise.
Here’s my 2 cents. Sorry if I’m repeating what others have posted. We won’t see crazy beehive do’s or coat Gorns. Nor would we want to. This holds true for the Enterprise. The original was smooth and simple ‘cuz that’s what it needed to be to get the cameras rolling ASAP. The designers had grand plans for all set pieces and vehicles as is the inspect on any prod. However they were horrendously limited by time and budget. We should keep in mind that GRod and his art dept would have pushed the details much much further had they the resources. If you have any doubts just look at the 1701-A. It is so far beyond what a simple military “refit’ would undergo entailed. Gene and the boys were free to cut loose and give us something amazing new and very different than 1965. Instead of arguing about whether or not this or that should be unchanged let’s hope that the new aggroup asks themselves this question: What would they have done in 1965 with an unlimited budget and another year to design? Use the 1965 designs as a springboard. Take what were basically rushed thumbnail sketches and finish the painting. The shapes are all there they just never had time to finish the masterpiece.
#99: That image was the first one released by CBS Digital showing off what the Enteprise would look like for the Star Trek Remastered project. That was the first copy they used for the first few remastered episodes. It was soon replaced with a more detailed version that allowed for faster FX rendering.
I still think that Dennis Bailey’s U. S. S. Phoenix design would make a perfect Enterprise for this movie. It retains the classic cause everyone knows while adding necessary details that both give it a sense of scale and bring it closer to the update seen in TMP. It’s a beautiful create by mental act much closer to the spirit of the ship than Gabe Koerner’s lovely yet overly “teched up” version.
I’m dying to see what the new version of the Enterprise will look desire! Won’t someone from the production please PLEASE throw us a bone?
#109 - I agree about the Ewoks; ROTJ was weak overall but much much better than 1,2,and 3. Dennis for good or bad nitpicking HAS been an integral part of Star Trek fandom almost ever since I can remember (Trek magazine for example) and I don’t see that changing. For myself. I am trying to come to grips (gripes?) with the changes in feature Trek. I comfort hope that the Enterprise won’t be “Akirarized” but the movie ordain be what it will be. Most feature Trek fans I know of do know the difference between real life and fiction. Or maybe they don’t so that’s why they work to alter real life more like Star Trek. There are worse things than trying to make the world better.>;>}
I am reminded of when New Line Cinema changed the Jupiter II and the create by mental act of the Robot for the new Lost in lay movie. When licensed merchandise came out both new design and original design merchandise was on the shelves. From everything I’ve construe the original design cram outsold the new design stuff by a very large margin.
While people say they like stuff to be updated they also be to be more comfortable with what is “familiar”. Anybody remember the fiasco when “Coke II” was released? A slight update to the original formula and the public had a fit.
When the new Star Trek movie comes out and new licensed items for the “updated” Enterprise are on the shelves. I’m sure original Enterprise items ordain be there as well. ordain be interesting to see which items fly off the shelf first. It would also be interesting to know the comparison of sales of the original Enterprise model kits versus the sale of movie-era Enterprise kits since 1979 when the first movie came out. I doubt anyone has that data but I would gamble that the original design Enterprise wins.
One more thing to believe is the air of measure. The original models were built to enter on craptastic old television screens. The models used were quite small as well (in relation to their real world coat). Bumping a model up in scale just a bit can make a tremendous difference. If you study the 3 foot Millenium Falcon vs the 6 foot shooting model you will get an idea. There is a world of difference between them. Now imagine a 12 or 16 pay model etc. CG should allow the enterprise to be “seen” for the first time. It should “remove the gause” so to speak. We should see details that were “always there” just beyond our focus just out of arrive. The new CG models are great but they are really just faithful copies of small measure low budget TV models. When we sharpen the focus and hurry in the her the Enterprise should reveal things desire color docking ports and suprise panels that we always thought should be there and in fact always were! It’s only logical.
Sorry. My inform was that if ENT had used a “Daedelus”-class-looking design (shown in a copy in Sisko’s office in DS9) for the NX-01 that some might not realize that the initial Yorktown designs during the run-up to the series had preceeded the Discovery/A. C. Clarke write partial/full ‘dumbell’-configured ship.
I don’t know if they would have ‘pushed’ the create by mental act much further. Granted in the real world things then still in development desire the LEM had all sorts of stuff sticking out but the scifi ship design aesthetic of the period was from what I recall your rivet-less smooth skin (think Jupiter 2 think C-57D cruiser from FP etc.) with windows and lights combined with the oft-mentioned theory of designing a craft that didn’t have stuff outside where a hypothetical crewdog would have to don an EVA conform to to keep the damaged (phaser control circuitry. Feinberger relay whatever) in that external GNDN conduit.
I was trying to show that we have as much understanding on how a Starships hull could be put together as anyone from the 19th century understands how a Nuclear submarine’s engineering is accomplished.
200+ years of engineering and design ordain provide plenty of new building techniques that we can not conceive of today. And I am sure a smooth seemless hull could provide benefits to the Starship design that we cannot now understand. Simply put a change surface remove can be believable and logical and yes majestic.
Don’t get me wrong Tigress. I like the smooth be of her. It’s just that what’s smooth at that measure and that hold might reveal hidden details when examined up change state not just smoothness to an infinite degree. While each piece of the massive hull would be built to the most exacting measurements the finished product would most likely reveal that it was in fact made of millions of individual parts not carved from a block of stain. The play of light on the panels would be dazzling. I’m hoping JJ gets us right up in there desire never before. As for not pushing the envelope further you might be right but I imagine Roddenberry looking at the consoles full of candy buttons and chochkies and wishing for a little something more or the refit would have just been more of the same. Remember it was only 7 or 8 years later that he began the designwork for Phase 2. It’s fun to query. Wish he was here to help answer these questions.
You just experience someone working on the film is reading this come in and laughing at us. For weeks now we’ve mentioned our preference for the displace create by mental act. And we’ve show our own ideas. Abrams says he will respect journey history. But that doesn’t mean he can’t find a loophole or two. Between the NX-01 and NCC-17001,there can be a intermediate design. This has already been mention above,show the Enterprise when she was first launched. Its going to look different,it changed twice in the original series. The engines were changed and communicate dish was shrunk,as was the bridge. But it wasn’t really that noticeable,but trying to mesh things for continuity is going to create problems. Personally I still find Dennis Baileys design the best in showing the same old thing,yet not. I can only hope the create by mental act team on this film will take that to heart,other wise when the first image is released. And they change it too much. That will be the day the internet shut-down.
The Warp 5 Drive and Grapplers were fine and the Spatial Torpedoes were at least a different tech although the name is fairly indescriptive (were they loaded with Spatial Warheads? Containing Spatial Energy?) although the Vulcans and Klingons had Warp 6 drives and in 2161 there was a Warp 7 drive anyway…
Could we be seeing the “birth” of the ship we experience and like? Could this be a “prime” version? Might we see OUR displace by film’s end?
The shape is true… and the nacelles have the antennaes the way the original “Cage” create by mental act had!!
Consider this…Why in the 21st century do we have sleek stealthy aircraft (F-18s and Joint Stike Fighters)? Would not a logical progression show that smooth skin vessels (23rd century’s NCC-1701) be so? Regardless when Roddenberry was approving the first design of the Enterprise it was smooth as well only when the series was given the green light for production that he “dirtied the ship up abit” and mapped textures/details and a barely noticable top saucer grid. I’m hoping they stay adjust to the original ship and add finer detail for the big screen…thats all. And lets all wish that they use a model for scale and charge. Check out her history right here:
Thanks for the photos and the accompanying text. I’m no CGI expert but it seems to me a copy would be better for close-up shots while CG is acceptable for the longer shots.
By the way…I’m glad their second studio (Linwood Dunn’s studio) had air conditioning so that guy could put his apparel approve on.
In the 22nd. 23rd and 24th centuries they use rayguns and travel in big starships and use transporters and such.
Jump send to the 29th or 30th century and they call them “temporal transporters” but they’re comfort beaming down and flying around in big ships and so on and so forth.
Hey at least in Enterprise (the series) they didn’t have shields and thus they did take on more visible hull damage than the later Enterprises. I also appreciated the greater use of shuttles leaving the transporter for emergencies.
Here’s one thing it would be hard to retcon: How is it that society got all sexist just in the TOS era when in Archer’s day the women were dressed in relatively egalitarian garb (for the most move) and then later in the TNG era it happened again but in between all the women were forced to wear super-short miniskirts and there weren’t any women in command positions.
I for one thought that the Dadelus design. (which is canon since there was a model of the ship in Ben Sisco’s quarters) and referred to in the Beverly Crusher’s medical ship in “All Good Things” is a neat design as a retro look. I would have rather seen something like that in Enterprise than what we got which was too similar to the actual first Enterprise that came 100 years later.
#150: “I for one thought that the Dadelus create by mental act. (which is canon since there was a model of the ship in Ben Sisco’s quarters) and referred to in the Beverly Crusher’s medical ship in “All Good Things” is a neat design as a retro be.”
Well first of all it’s not “canon” - there was a model in a shot on DS9 yeah but it was never identified onscreen as a “Daedalus.” That it was a Daedalus was someone’s *intention,* but a new designer or writer or producer could explicitly identify some completely different kind of ship as a Daedalus without contradicting a thing that was ever said or shown in a “Star Trek” production.
I don’t like the globe-hulled ship but more interesting than my opinion I suppose is that of its designer. Matt Jefferies:
“The habitat part I felt ideally should be a roll but it got too awkward to play with. It just didn’t be like it would get out of first gear much less the speeds he was talking about. So it gradually got flattened.”
That’s a generally fascinating interview. BTW in which the guy most responsible for the look of “Star Trek” speaks at greater length and more specifically about his designs than almost anywhere else. It can be found here:
one imagines we might get to see something really new in the conception-o-spock scene pointy eared vulcan spermatoids maybe.
love seeing the april fool ‘prise again in manages to address every single fear expressed at this site right drink to the enthusiastic “much better!” scrawl thanks to all involved a nitpickers money shot.
Although I don’t consider STV to be taken seriously. I assumed that the cave was the family birthplace considering the Vulcan penchant for ancient traditions.
But a hospital seems a better displace! According to Gene himself as on “Inside ST” he states that Spock was genetically altered to enable a Human-Vulcan offspring something not possible by itself and certainly the first.
#150: “All Good Things” took displace in a an alternate future where The Enterprise was equip with three nacelles. Both ships were alter but neither is canon.
I hope JJ’s Enterprise can do a saucer separation. I think the old Franz Joseph Constitution Class blueprints said it could.
#158Actually from the ‘Inside ST’ CD I think you will sight that Sarek said to Roddenberry when GR stated that Spock was the first Vulcan/Human hybrid. “No not the first. But the first to defeat.”Cool CD listened to it again in my car recently and my partner just gives me one of “those” looks. :)
#159I think that pointed nacelles and an oversized deflector dish will serve to make the model look well a bit corny IMO. We be to see something going on inside the nacelles (at the domes) that will convey the sheer power being generated to act her. Something not unlike what we saw for the engineering section in ST:TMP would be a good idea. Also the smaller defelctor dish gave the model a better sense of measure to me. Which is why I think they changed it. But I honestly think that the deflector cater needs to be incorporated more into the hull much like the re-fitted Enterprise had in ST:TMP
authorise I admit it I love that displace. If the designers can come up with something that honours the original and has elements of the ship from ST:TMP then for me that ordain be just about ameliorate.
…or Pike had lost approximately 40% of his crew prior to the events shown in “The Cage”. Damn. Being an “Ensign Ricky” aboard Pike’s Enterprise was even worse than being aboard during Kirk’s command.
/I won’t mention the possibility of James “Tomcat” Kirk stocking the “E” with female personnel to cover his needs for a beat “5 year mission” LOL
Pointed Nacelles!Pointed Nacelles!Pointed Nacelles!Large Deflector cater!Large Deflector Dish!Large Deflector Dish!Taller Bridge Dome!Taller connect Dome!Taller Bridge Dome!Decal Makings on Saucer Top!Decal Makings on Saucer Top!Decal Makings on Saucer Top! ANNNNNNNNNNND…….. Small Holes on Back Of the Engines…. NO BALLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
#145 - Nitpicking in terms of intelligent attention to dilate and discussion thereof is allot. One can take it to a ridiculous and petty extreme which I accept is not necessary. Now I might act something to a ridiculous extreme but not a petty one >;>} and usually I have a point or some intended validity to it. Usually.
These CGI vs model arguments do be to get silly. I don’t understand how a six eight or twelve foot model can give mass more effectively than a pixelated image - both are pretending to be something they are not. As for Trek CGI never looking good. The Enterprise E was fully CGI for both Insurrection and Nemesis. It looked big to me. And saying the fx never looked better than the TMP copy well. I guess if you ignore the gratuitous matte lines…..
Also. I don’t really see the need for surface plating details to lend an air of authenticity. There are cruise ships plying the waters at this moment that are larger than the Enterprise and made up of thousands of six-foot steel plates yet their hulls and smooth and shiny white.
Bottom line. The budget of this film s going to make the ship look phenomenal - exceed than any Trek we have ever seen regardless of the create by mental act.
Nobody seems to get what I’m saying…. I don’t think the Daedalus design is better than what we got on TOS. I’m not saying the name is canon. Just that the sphere-hulled ship was recognised as a past ship on DS9 and was given a nod to on All Good Things,” alternate future or not.
So. I would have liked to undergo seen it used in a prequel show somehow showing the evolution of the Federation ships that were before the sleek displace in TOS. It sould still look cool in a retro-past history way rather than the Akira copy we got.
In the “Star Trek: Ships of the lie” calender and schedule I undergo there is an visualise of a Bonaventure Class starship. I could not for the life of me find an image of it although there is one with the NX-01 style deflector dish (which I don’t personally care for) when I did a search online. The one from the calender has a TOS style deflector and is very reminiscent of the beloved original. What would people have thought of that one in “Enterprise”? Just for giggles.
I for one will never forget seeing the TMP NCC-1701 for the 1st time on the big screen in 1978 (New York City. Loews Orpheum. E. 86th St.). I did not object the endless shuttle go with Scotty as many did.
And this was after having been blown away by the highly detailed Klingon cruisers getting womped by V’ger at the start.
I was much happier with the NX-01 than with some fugly ball-shaped displace ala the so-called “Daedalus.”
As far as ship separation is concerned. Kirk refers to the capability once in “The Apple.” It’s been assumed by a lot of people based on background information that this was a one-time-only emergency manuever but the question has never been addressed on-screen.
171. Hold a matchbox next to a real car to get my meaning. They arent pretending to be they simply are. As the Enterprise simply is. The bigger the model (CG or styrene) the more detail you see is all. Zooming in on a smaller copy just gives you a bigger image of something small. The Falcon is a good example since the filming models ranged from the size of a create verbally up to 6 feet long. When you see the 3 footer it looks perfect. You’d swear it’s all there. It isn’t. be at the bigger one and it’s amazing how much more detailed it is. Same displace. Different scales. Mass. Just look at a bug under a microscope same thing. I hope the Enterprise looks smooth from a distance (like it did on TV) then as the camera gets closer we all go. “WOW. I never knew this and that were there!” It should feel natural. I think we all agree on that. And yes by all means the lighting is critical too.
“Basically I wanted to act it as plain as I could. To be able to play light on it. I didn’t want to fill the exterior up with what looked desire equipment of some kind. We used to talk about Murphy’s law that whatever man makes will break at the most inopportune time. So why have equipment on the outside in the worst possible environment to put a crewman out to work on it if you can keep it on the inside?”
Either technique will be effective if done properly. In Star Trek V the model was not lit properly and looked terrible. Daren Doc made a CGI Enterprise and Doug Trumbull raved about it:
Buckaroo that is SWEET!! Loved it! As the saucer section came flying back toward us. I couldn’t back up but evaluate that they should have had an episode where the crew go back in measure (yes again) to address some crisis in our present day and the saucer section gets spotted (in the upper atmosphere) from the ground as a flying saucer! Nice!
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://trekmovie.com/2007/11/29/famous-location-standing-in-for-a-vulcan-birth-more-on-the-enterprise/
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|