Topic: OT: The New Enterprise  (Read 9563 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ModelsPlease

  • Retired Model Junkie
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 4665
  • Gender: Male
  • ModelsPlease
OT: The New Enterprise
« on: January 22, 2008, 12:11:45 pm »
Found some more screenies....
« Last Edit: January 22, 2008, 12:22:15 pm by ModelsPlease »

ModelsPlease, resident "Model Junkie" recovering from a tragic crayon sharpener accident.

Offline AsYlUm

  • Follow the white rabbit
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 180
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2008, 12:21:35 pm »
lol.... is it me or does that look like the other one you posted a while back thats being modelled as we speak  :laugh:

curious


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD3YBxBlR5E         <-- gagarin video

Offline JohanobesusII

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 117
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2008, 12:54:22 pm »
Yeah, I'm pretty sure the first picture is a fan made render.  The second is a still from the teaser trailer running before Cloverfield.  So far it is the only released image of the new Enterprise I've seen.  Since the film is scheduled for release in December, they likely haven't even done any of the effects shots yet.

Offline atheorhaven

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1801
    • Mare Imbrium Shipyards
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2008, 12:54:41 pm »
Found some more screenies....


Shot one is Gabe's ship (which appears to be a cropped version of shot 6).. shot two is a screen capture from the new movie (which is apparently not Gabe's ship).. just wanted to mention that.. :)

Second shot from the new movie is here:


Or:
http://trekmovie.com/images/sttease/sttease_01.jpg
http://trekmovie.com/images/sttease/sttease_02.jpg
http://trekmovie.com/images/sttease/sttease_03.jpg
http://trekmovie.com/images/sttease/sttease_04.jpg
http://trekmovie.com/images/sttease/sttease_05.jpg
http://trekmovie.com/images/sttease/sttease_06.jpg

;)
..ooOOoo..totally useless information..ooOOoo..

Mare Imbrium Shipyards - http://mareimbrium.webhop.net

Don't bother checking out my website for the most recent updates, because I've
been too lazy to update it!  Check Battleclinic!

Offline AsYlUm

  • Follow the white rabbit
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 180
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2008, 03:10:17 pm »
And looking at the screenines...

F*CK i cant wait... i love trek all aspects good and bad.. it all adds to it....

and this looks so sweet  :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD3YBxBlR5E         <-- gagarin video

Offline atheorhaven

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1801
    • Mare Imbrium Shipyards
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2008, 03:30:13 pm »
I'm honestly mixed on it..

I love the idea of Zachary Quintos being in the role of Spock, and there appears to be some good casting.. but I'm really worried about revisionist history and effects on this one.

As long as the story is good, I'll be there in the theater.  But if buddies are saying bad things about it, I'll wait until comes out on DVD and then a bit.. (still haven't seen all of Nemesis to date for this reason.)
..ooOOoo..totally useless information..ooOOoo..

Mare Imbrium Shipyards - http://mareimbrium.webhop.net

Don't bother checking out my website for the most recent updates, because I've
been too lazy to update it!  Check Battleclinic!

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2008, 05:08:19 pm »
I'm just dying to see how they get that beast into orbit. I wish we could get a better look at the nacelles, I think we might end up liking what we see. I like the TMPesque saucer but my favorite bits of both TOS and TMP Enterprises have always been the impulse engines and nacelles.
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Centurus

  • Old Mad Man Making Ship Again....Kinda?
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8502
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2008, 05:23:51 pm »
I seriously disagree with their choice for McCoy.  They should have gotten Gary Sinese.  He's a great actor, and most importantly, he looks alot like the late DeForest Kelley.  Also, I believe he'd be more capable of staying true to the role.
The pen is truly mightier than the sword.  And considerably easier to write with.

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2008, 05:33:31 pm »
Completely agree on Sinese, but if they try and spin this off into a series they'd be hard pressed to pull him off CSI:NY
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Smiley

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 332
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2008, 05:47:37 pm »
Simon Pegg, as hilarious as he is, I just cannot imagine as Scotty. I instinctively expect to see his big friend bounding around the corner exclaiming "You've never seen Bad Boyz 2?"(!!!)

Signature: Terran Empire Relentless: WZ, All Other Models: Smiley

Offline Don Karnage

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2327
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #10 on: January 22, 2008, 06:23:18 pm »
well if the get a good actor to play young spock, it might be a good movie, so if the use the kid who play picard in one of the tng episode is not a good idea.

Offline Centurus

  • Old Mad Man Making Ship Again....Kinda?
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8502
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #11 on: January 22, 2008, 06:36:17 pm »
Simon Pegg, as hilarious as he is, I just cannot imagine as Scotty. I instinctively expect to see his big friend bounding around the corner exclaiming "You've never seen Bad Boyz 2?"(!!!)

 :laugh: :laugh:  +1
The pen is truly mightier than the sword.  And considerably easier to write with.

Offline Centurus

  • Old Mad Man Making Ship Again....Kinda?
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8502
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #12 on: January 22, 2008, 06:38:54 pm »
Completely agree on Sinese, but if they try and spin this off into a series they'd be hard pressed to pull him off CSI:NY

It may be possible.  It wouldn't be the first time an actor worked 2 different television shows at the very same time.

One such example comes to mind is Victoria Rowell.  She played Amanda Bentley on Diagnosis Murder, and she was also on some soap opera I can't remember.  And she did both shows at the same time. 

If the movie was picked up as a TOS redo, and they got Sinese as Bones, his schedule would be hectic, but it would be doable.  Depending on where the new series was shot.
The pen is truly mightier than the sword.  And considerably easier to write with.

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #13 on: January 22, 2008, 09:10:37 pm »
Anything's possible I suppose, I hadn't thought of him doing both at the same time. Seems playing a lead in two series at once would be a bit rough though.
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Centurus

  • Old Mad Man Making Ship Again....Kinda?
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8502
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #14 on: January 22, 2008, 10:13:09 pm »
Anything's possible I suppose, I hadn't thought of him doing both at the same time. Seems playing a lead in two series at once would be a bit rough though.

It is, but it's doable.  Although, to be perfectly honest, after giving much more thought, chances are if there were a revamped TOS show, it would probably be shot here in Southern California, and since CSI: NY is shot in New York, it would be nearly impossible for him to do two shows at the same time.  Unless he filmed the majority of episodes for one show in bulk, and then filmed the bulk of episodes for the other directly after, and then kinda going back and forth to shoot a couple more shows at a time for both, but then that would become too demanding.
The pen is truly mightier than the sword.  And considerably easier to write with.

Offline Starforce2

  • Bridge Commander Ambassador
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2827
    • Nightsoft SFC File Dump
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #15 on: January 22, 2008, 11:38:36 pm »
http://trekmovie.com/images/sttease/sttease_01.jpg

What part of the ship are we looking at here? I see fins going up on the side, is this a view on top of a nacelle looking fwd?

Also, one of the books (yea, I know, not canon, but many novels are better or as good as the best trek eps) had the tmp saucer recieving a refit, and their reason for this was gravity. It's much easier to replace things like furnature and carpet in a gravity environment and not working in space suits. It was on the surface, and took off, went out to sea before kicking in the impulse. Now the drive hull on the other hand, or a fully assembled version would be a bit more dificult.

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #16 on: January 23, 2008, 02:38:05 am »
What part of the ship are we looking at here? I see fins going up on the side, is this a view on top of a nacelle looking fwd?

Based on a rough estimate of the distance between the fins, yes that's most likely a shot from back to front on the nacelle.
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Pestalence_XC

  • "The Terminator"
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2636
  • Gender: Male
  • "The Terminator" Pestalence_XC, Xenocorp
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #17 on: January 23, 2008, 07:39:10 am »
In reference to the first post in this thread.. the top image is not from the Movie.. that is a picture of Gabe koerner's CGI model from a Fan Based trailer.

Hope this helps
"You still don't get it, do you?......That's what he does. That's all he does! You can't stop him! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead!"

Member :
Xenocorp / Dynaverse.net Moderator & Beta Test Team
SFC 4 Project QA Coordinator
Taldren Beta Test Team
14 Degrees East Beta Test Team
Activision Visioneers SFC 3 Beta Test Team

Offline dragoon

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 759
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #18 on: January 23, 2008, 09:02:48 am »
i struggle to understand some peoples opposition almost to this film.
I class these people in the same way I do with Casino Royale with Daniel Craig. They ranted that he was wrong, that he didn't look right, that the film was a reset for the whole Bond mythos etc... Yet it turned out to be the biggest Grossing bond film; and got the most critical approval than any other Bond film. I thought it was awesome, and can't wait for the next Bond with DC. I think this film is going to be fantastic. TOS, if viewed in a detached way, is terrible. The acting is bad, the sets are awful, the effects are bad... which is to be expected. In my view, it was the movies with TOS cast that really established them in our culture, not the TV series                                                           . And those movies give everything a make over.
 It seems to me, that people really want the original trio and the 1701. We can't have them, because their dead or too old/outdated. So instead of having another derivative show with Star Trek slapped onto the title, lets go back to the beginning and rebuild what made it so popular in the first place.

Star Trek as of a year or two ago was dead. We all felt that after Enterprise was canceled, we would get nothing for maybe 10/15 years, but here we are, a film with twice the budget of the last one, with a Director and writing cast that are highly respected and lauded for their previous work. While we should just accept this new Trek because it's Trek, we should at least be thankfully that someone is trying to make it great again, and that the show we all love is being given another chance at life.

I honestly think that the die hard fans could play a hand in destroying this film with their canon based tantrums by spoiling it for those who either are not into Trek or who like it, but don't froth at the mouth when Klingons are encountered 15 minutes before it was stated in a different series. So I guess I would say to these guys... Be calm, give it a chance. If you refuse to do that, at least don't spoil it by turning casual viewers away. Some of us want more trek, even if it's not in the form you like. And to get more, we need to bring in people who are not fans. We need their money.  :D
God said to the Welsh: 'I am going to give you this glorious land of lakes and mountains.' So where's the catch, asked the Welsh? 'Wait until you see the neighbours,' replied God.

Offline atheorhaven

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1801
    • Mare Imbrium Shipyards
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #19 on: January 23, 2008, 10:21:10 am »
i struggle to understand some peoples opposition almost to this film.
I class these people in the same way I do with Casino Royale with Daniel Craig. They ranted that he was wrong, that he didn't look right, that the film was a reset for the whole Bond mythos etc... Yet it turned out to be the biggest Grossing bond film; and got the most critical approval than any other Bond film. I thought it was awesome, and can't wait for the next Bond with DC.


He was wrong, he doesn't look right, it was a reset, and to each their own.  I've seen every one of the Bond movies, and I rate him behind George Lazenby.  But that's my own opinion, of an older fan, and you have yours.  You're what that new line of movies needs these days.. I'd still rather have seen more movies with Brosnan in them..

I think this film is going to be fantastic. TOS, if viewed in a detached way, is terrible. The acting is bad, the sets are awful, the effects are bad... which is to be expected. In my view, it was the movies with TOS cast that really established them in our culture, not the TV series


*Completely* disagree here.. without the original series going into syndication, we'd not know that much about Star Trek at all.  It was the original series in syndication, plus the cast and stories that established the franchise.  And effects were better than average for that time period.  Ever seen early "Doctor Who"?  That's bad effects and awful sets.. and if you want to see bad acting, watch some of the episodes with William Hartnell (the first Doctor) and watch the companions act.  Or, I should say,"act".  And this is coming from a fan.  Shatner was the worst actor of the bunch, mainly because he was so over the top.. and noone had really matched that until Avery Brooks hit the screen..

But it was the original series influence and the fans of that series that gave us a NASA test shuttle named "Enterprise" (before the first Trek movie), and it was that same fan base for that show being so massive that Paramount wanted to try "Phase 2", which spun into the first Trek movie.

I'm willing to give the new movie a chance, but I'll wait until others I trust have seen it first before I spend money on it.

                                                           . And those movies give everything a make over.
 It seems to me, that people really want the original trio and the 1701. We can't have them, because their dead or too old/outdated. So instead of having another derivative show with Star Trek slapped onto the title, lets go back to the beginning and rebuild what made it so popular in the first place.

Star Trek as of a year or two ago was dead. We all felt that after Enterprise was canceled, we would get nothing for maybe 10/15 years, but here we are, a film with twice the budget of the last one, with a Director and writing cast that are highly respected and lauded for their previous work. While we should just accept this new Trek because it's Trek, we should at least be thankfully that someone is trying to make it great again, and that the show we all love is being given another chance at life.


Hang on a sec... "While we should just accept this new Trek because it's Trek"... ummmm, no.. that's like saying,"We should consider 'Spock's Brain' a good episode because it had the original Three in it."  I view TNG, DS9 and Voyager as being offshoots of Q's influence in the Federation's development as seen in "All Good Things".  I view Enterprise as being an influence of Daniels and the Shadow Guy's Temporal Cold War interference.  I mean, the Mirror Universe's Terran Empire falling?  Please...
I see them all as stand-alone entities, splinter universes that may or may not have happened, (that we caught a glimpse of in "Parallels") and that had no influence on the universe that we saw in the Original Series.


Does that mean that my opinion is right or wrong?  Nope.. it's my own opinion and interpretation of what I've seen, and I'm welcome to it, as you have your own.

I honestly think that the die hard fans could play a hand in destroying this film with their canon based tantrums by spoiling it for those who either are not into Trek or who like it, but don't froth at the mouth when Klingons are encountered 15 minutes before it was stated in a different series. So I guess I would say to these guys... Be calm, give it a chance. If you refuse to do that, at least don't spoil it by turning casual viewers away. Some of us want more trek, even if it's not in the form you like. And to get more, we need to bring in people who are not fans. We need their money.  :D


So even legitimate concerns, based over and off what we've seen in the past, are irrelevant and tantrums?  Words like "tantrum" and "froth" are argumentative to say the least here.. long time fans, if they didn't exist, would make all this irrelevant.  The thing to remember here.. long time fans have been waiting for a really good Star Trek movie for a long time now.  If this new movie is good, fantastic.  If it gives the franchise an enema, even better.  But if it totally destroys everything that we've ever seen before, then you also can guarantee that those long time fans will use their own networks to make sure that their money walks away from this film.  Without the long time fan behind it, the movie will flop.

I, personally, have no problems with seeing the franchise rest for 10-15 years for a restart.. after all, it worked for Doctor Who, and that is a much better show because of it.  The problem is, Paramount is treating Trek too much like the camel in the "Staff of Life" joke and we're expected to be the nun.  ;)
..ooOOoo..totally useless information..ooOOoo..

Mare Imbrium Shipyards - http://mareimbrium.webhop.net

Don't bother checking out my website for the most recent updates, because I've
been too lazy to update it!  Check Battleclinic!

Offline OlBuzzard

  • renegade
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1759
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #20 on: January 23, 2008, 10:52:03 am »
Yeah .. I know ... it's been a while.  I some will no doubt wish that it had remained even longer.

Atheorhaven :

You have a good grasp on the entire matter buddy.  Particularly from the stand point of understanding the old fan based support for Trek. 

Side note: I disagree with the Bond thing about him "looking wrong"  ... that was not relevant ..  but the "restart" being "pre-cold war" ..  ummm welllll ...  that was the only thing I saw as negative.  The rest was great acting .. and a well written script.  It should NOT have been done, however, as a mater of timing just after being promoted to "00" status.  It screws up the entire time line thingy...

As for Trek:  I will watch this one closely ..  to see if it will do justice to the Trek theme and time line.  I don't think it can get any worse than "The Final Frontier".  I DO hope that it will launch the possibilities of new fans and the eventual growth of the series while continuing to provide Paramount the $$$ they want in order to even desire to keep it around.

Cooling down and eventual restart?  Possibly ...  I don't know that I'm the one to make that call.

One thing you did say that is true:  Some of the fans ARE a bit too critical.  Just bring up the "Enterprise NX-1"  and you will see what I'm talking about.  Personally I think the NX-1 is excellent ..   well done as a retro.  And when it gets right down to it ..  it COMPLIMENTS the series including the Akira!  Did anyone stop to think that MAYBE that was what they had in mind?  NOPE ..  first reaction on the behalf of some is to draw blood when it does not match other fan based ideals.

I do agree that we should see the film first.  I personally appreciate the post and it's original ideal for which it was made.  I eagerly await the movie!
If you aim at nothing:  you WILL hit it every time !

Offline atheorhaven

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1801
    • Mare Imbrium Shipyards
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #21 on: January 23, 2008, 11:55:59 am »
Yeah .. I know ... it's been a while.  I some will no doubt wish that it had remained even longer.


Buzz!  Good to see you.  :)  Say "Hi" to Paul for me and get the bum to drop me some email.. ;)

Atheorhaven :
You have a good grasp on the entire matter buddy.  Particularly from the stand point of understanding the old fan based support for Trek.


Well, it's my opinion right or wrong.. is that something that ultimately will affect this movie?  Can't think that one persons opinion will, but my opinion has been formed as a long time fan, and chances are that others (new or old) will share my opinion.  I'm totally willing to give it a chance in the same way that I was willing to give "Batman Begins" and "Superman Returns" a chance, and I went and saw both of those in the theater (SR in Imax).  "Golden Compass" I went and saw in the theater despite the controversy as well as the last "Bean" movie.  "Watchmen" I'll do the same with when it comes out, and if I hear good things about Trek XI, I'll do that as well.  But if I hear from my friends that it was pretty bad, I'll either wait until it hits the cheap theaters or else wait until I can rent it on DVD like I did with "Ghost Rider".  I actually am an honest to goodness theater going movie watcher, and my money does count a tiny bit at the box office.  Not everyone sees things in a theater these days, and by the time that a movie trickles over to DVD, usually word of mouth has spread enough to seal its fate there.  *cough*godzilla*cough*

Side note: I disagree with the Bond thing about him "looking wrong"  ... that was not relevant ..  but the "restart" being "pre-cold war" ..  ummm welllll ...  that was the only thing I saw as negative.  The rest was great acting .. and a well written script.  It should NOT have been done, however, as a mater of timing just after being promoted to "00" status.  It screws up the entire time line thingy...


Hey, just my personal opinion.. I was waiting for Brosnan to be Bond before Dalby became Bond.  I don't see Craig as Bond.  Some people don't see anyone other than Connery as Bond.  But Connery and Brosnan I saw in the role, Moore less so, Lazenby less so again, and Craig less so again.  Just my personal opinion, and YMMV, and I've never said otherwise.

As for Trek:  I will watch this one closely ..  to see if it will do justice to the Trek theme and time line.  I don't think it can get any worse than "The Final Frontier".  I DO hope that it will launch the possibilities of new fans and the eventual growth of the series while continuing to provide Paramount the $$$ they want in order to even desire to keep it around.
Cooling down and eventual restart?  Possibly ...  I don't know that I'm the one to make that call.


Sure you are.. your $$$ will make that call along with everyone elses $$$.  If it's a good movie, a good script, a good cast, and there is enough respect for history of the show, the $$$ will tell Paramount that they're onto a good thing and we may see more of the reboot.  If it's not, the $$$ will go elsewhere, this'll be giving Sybok the Happy Vulcan company in Trek Shelf Limbo, and we won't hear about it again for a while.

Don't get me wrong here.  I would like to see the same sort of reboot happen that happened on "Doctor Who".  They rebooted that series and maintained the history of the show (as seen in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Nature_%28Doctor_Who_episode%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Crash
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_Reunion_(Doctor_Who)

So I can't see why it can't be done with Trek.

One thing you did say that is true:  Some of the fans ARE a bit too critical.  Just bring up the "Enterprise NX-1"  and you will see what I'm talking about.  Personally I think the NX-1 is excellent ..   well done as a retro.  And when it gets right down to it ..  it COMPLIMENTS the series including the Akira!  Did anyone stop to think that MAYBE that was what they had in mind?  NOPE ..  first reaction on the behalf of some is to draw blood when it does not match other fan based ideals.
I do agree that we should see the film first.  I personally appreciate the post and it's original ideal for which it was made.  I eagerly await the movie!


I want to see the movie done, and I want to see new people and new life come to Trek.  I'd like to see it as well done as Doctor Who was done.  I don't want to see it done like BSG, dumping everything that ever came before.  *That* is the difference here.  Good writers can revitalize a show and make it fresh and new.  Hacks have to pad a show.  I want to see a good script and a revitalize and a future for Trek.  Because if the new movie flops and the fans hate it and Paramount puts Trek back on the shelf, there's no telling when it'll come off again.  They might kill it entirely, they might sell it, they might sit on it like the source code for SFC has been sat on.  Who knows.  All the long time fans want to see is a good movie, done well, that doesn't make them feel like an outsider with implanted memories of things "that never happened".  That's what I get with BSG.  That isn't what I get with Who, and I don't want to see that with Trek.

But as always.. YMMV.  >:)
« Last Edit: January 23, 2008, 12:06:01 pm by atheorhaven »
..ooOOoo..totally useless information..ooOOoo..

Mare Imbrium Shipyards - http://mareimbrium.webhop.net

Don't bother checking out my website for the most recent updates, because I've
been too lazy to update it!  Check Battleclinic!

Offline OlBuzzard

  • renegade
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1759
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #22 on: January 23, 2008, 12:44:11 pm »
Yeah ..  I agree with what ya said with regard to the "reboot" idea!  IF one was done and it did not take away from the history (etc) of the original series that would be a good thing.  I also agree with ya on the BSG series ... ECCH!  (just my personal opinion publically expressed).  As you said IMO BSG totally destroyed the main charactors and substituted in its place ones that were often defiled and corrupt.  Some of the ships, graphics etc were ok ..  but the rest was so far removed from the content and original story line of the original that frankly I could have  (and STILL) careless about the entire remake.

It should be noted that a similar experiment was tried with "Bonanza" ....  it even made one of the mildest charactors who's life on and OFF the screen was one of the better personalities seemed to be filled with "smut".  The series flopped before it got started.

BTW...  it should be noted that I thought that the Batman Begins movie rocked !  I especially fell in love with the car.  It was so contrasting .. and yet at the core of it's design ..  it actually made it more "plausible" than the original design.  I thought they did an excellent job on getting Bruce Wane into the "Batman".  It actually made sense and gave a certain amount of credibility to his "abilities" (so to speak).  I especially liked how he determined NOT to be a part of the league of shadows ...  instead to fight crime ..  etc.  That made the transition very well.  (again all  of this is just my opinion)

I guess what I'm trying to say ..  is that if it is done right ..  some change can be good.  I guess that is why I liked the NX-1.  It did actually give a certain "credibility" to the newer TOS model  (if that makes sense).  As long as that change, new movie, charactors, personalities introduced as part of the new Trek "cannon"  does not attempt to redefine the old as some sort of "dark side" of the truth ...  or become another BSG twist to Trek ..  then yes...  I agree!

And as you said ..   just my $.02 worth ...

I now return you to the original intent of this thread ..   the posting of screenies ..   

Thanks for the post ..  I do like it !
If you aim at nothing:  you WILL hit it every time !

Offline Chris Johnson

  • I used to be a Captain a forum or two ago...
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 817
  • Gender: Male
  • Hai! Hai!
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #23 on: January 24, 2008, 12:53:54 am »
Personally, I'm opposed to it to the point where if, with a guarantee it would work, someone invented a device that could take out memories, I'd take out the images of the teaser.

Now, don't get me wrong, it doesn't seem half-bad from a non-fan, objective, and non-me point of view, but as the years go by I seem to be more and more of a person of nostalgia; that I'd like to go back and revisit my younger days, back where I was more youthful, more ignorant, and when Trek was better (in my view, of course).  Even if it was just for a couple years back in time...

I don't know.  It's more of me than anything else why.  I don't think it's necessarily that television/movies and entertainment are taking a turn for the worst.  In some or many ways, they are, but I'm just fighting the urge to see things change.  Look where "rebooting" (and I know it officially wasn't, but it felt that way to me) took Enterprise...  Putting a TNG flair to something supposedly TOS (or pre-TOS), or, as it seems from what I've read, putting a Starship Troopers/Star Wars/other Scifi feel to Star Trek... It may work for a bit and may attract a non-fan that would've otherwise been turned off by gold, mustard, and blue sweatshirts for uniforms (2250s Starfleet attire) would give it a try but I doubt it'd last long.

I had thought that, after 2005 (the remastering of TOS episodes with new graphics aside), Trek would, for the most part, be in the hands of the fans who want to celebrate it and, perhaps in their own way, improve upon it as they see things themselves.  And, while I'm not some huge fan of fan films, it seemed to have worked for the most part.

But, I think it just won't work for me, not because of anything J.J. Abrams or anyone else have done or will do, but mainly because of me.  But who knows?  Maybe the film would be a success and much of the fan base would flock from a few veteran trek actors (and a lot of fans recasting the main Big E crew) making films themselves to a handful of professional actors (also recasting the Big E crew) and a veteran Trek actor making an official BSG-ish Trek film.  Though I have to wonder how stable this new Enterprise would be in flight when welded together like an old WWII battleship...

Since Batman Begins was brought up, I should also note I kind-of felt similarly with that film (and the upcoming one).  I might shrug off my idiocy and see it though, since it seems to be highly praised.

"Oh, shut up!" -- Wil Wheaton to Wesley Crusher

Offline Pestalence_XC

  • "The Terminator"
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2636
  • Gender: Male
  • "The Terminator" Pestalence_XC, Xenocorp
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #24 on: January 24, 2008, 03:41:45 am »
One thing that everyone has to remember.. the ship in Star Trek XI is 18 to 20 years before Kirk takes command for TOS.. The ship is still being built.. Robert April still has to take the first command then Christopher Pike gets her..

During the 19 years of service that the ship has before Kirk, even if the Star Trek XI version looks different, there are still refits / retrofits to make her into the TOS Enterprise we all love.

People act as if Kirk is coming out of the academy and on to the Enterprise..

Don't forget that Kirk's early career was on the U.S.S. Republic while he was an ensign... then he was a Lieutenant on the Ferrogut .. the Enterprise launched under command of Rober April in 2245, Kirk takes command in 2264, that is 19 years for refits and retrofits for the Big "E".
"You still don't get it, do you?......That's what he does. That's all he does! You can't stop him! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead!"

Member :
Xenocorp / Dynaverse.net Moderator & Beta Test Team
SFC 4 Project QA Coordinator
Taldren Beta Test Team
14 Degrees East Beta Test Team
Activision Visioneers SFC 3 Beta Test Team

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #25 on: January 24, 2008, 04:52:26 am »
You're assuming they will stick to that version of the Trek timeline. There may not be an April in this movie universe. They could have the Enterprise built in 2260/64 and Kirk commanding it from day one out of the shipyard or Kirk serving on the Enterprise under Pike. Check out the first episode of "ST: Reborn" which has Kirk as a LT under Pike, making XO and then after Pike being wounded in an attack getting the command.

Anything is possible, they could stick true as rain to established information and characters or they could honor the essence of Trek but wipe the slate on the who's who of the Trek universe with the exception of the main cast.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2008, 05:06:23 am by Vipre »
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Pestalence_XC

  • "The Terminator"
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2636
  • Gender: Male
  • "The Terminator" Pestalence_XC, Xenocorp
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #26 on: January 24, 2008, 04:59:52 am »
The role for Christopher Pike is assigned.. the movie year is set at 2244/2245.. however there has been no mention of Robert April for the Movie.
"You still don't get it, do you?......That's what he does. That's all he does! You can't stop him! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead!"

Member :
Xenocorp / Dynaverse.net Moderator & Beta Test Team
SFC 4 Project QA Coordinator
Taldren Beta Test Team
14 Degrees East Beta Test Team
Activision Visioneers SFC 3 Beta Test Team

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #27 on: January 24, 2008, 05:07:09 am »
Sorry I was in the middle of editing, I meant no April. (See above)

2245 for the entire movie is way too early unless they've already tossed out the character's birth dates. It'd make Kirk 14. Good bet it's 2253 or later, which could see a 20 year old Kirk serving under Pike.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2008, 05:27:57 am by Vipre »
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline atheorhaven

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1801
    • Mare Imbrium Shipyards
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #28 on: January 24, 2008, 10:02:44 am »
Sorry I was in the middle of editing, I meant no April. (See above)

2245 for the entire movie is way too early unless they've already tossed out the character's birth dates. It'd make Kirk 14. Good bet it's 2253 or later, which could see a 20 year old Kirk serving under Pike.

Or we could be looking at the construction process in 2245 until launch and initial shakedown(under April, being the shipyard captain), skip ahead a few years to see the Academy Days action and Pike, and the rumored thingy involving Nimoy and Quintos and that storyline.  Then see Kirk get assigned to the Enterprise as Captain after Pike's promotion and finally Kirk take the ship out of its latest refit looking like the Enterprise in "Where No Man Has Gone Before" just in time for the end credits.

My guess to how this'll go.. and I'm at least hoping to see a travelpod/spacedock scene then.. :)
..ooOOoo..totally useless information..ooOOoo..

Mare Imbrium Shipyards - http://mareimbrium.webhop.net

Don't bother checking out my website for the most recent updates, because I've
been too lazy to update it!  Check Battleclinic!

Offline Pestalence_XC

  • "The Terminator"
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2636
  • Gender: Male
  • "The Terminator" Pestalence_XC, Xenocorp
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #29 on: January 24, 2008, 10:27:24 am »
They are planning to stick to canon with the movie, at least that is what JJ has been saying..

Just referencing StarTrek.com for Enterprise Captains...

Reference TAS (The Animated Series)

Robert T. April
Played by James Doohan (voice)
Episode: ANI 22023 - The Counter-Clock Incident - 2245


A rugged, heroic-looking human male born in the year 2195, Captain Robert April was the first commander of the U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701 when it was launched in 2245 for its initial five-year mission. He was succeeded by Captain Christopher Pike.
On stardate 6770.3 (2270), April was a senior Starfleet commodore on his way to the Babel planetoid where his formal retirement ceremonies were to be held, per Starfleet regulations mandating that human officers retire at the age of 75. Because of their already advanced ages, Commodore April and his wife Sarah weren't debilitated by the reversed time-flow of the parallel antimatter universe in which the Enterprise became temporarily trapped during the voyage to Babel; instead, they were returned to the prime of their lives. The heroic manner in which the Aprils took command of the starship to get the vessel safely home after all other personnel aboard had grown too young to handle the controls motivated Starfleet to review its mandatory retirement rules, and to keep Commodore April on as the Federation's ambassador-at-large. Because neither Robert nor Sarah April harbored any regrets over how they had spent their lives, they opted to use the Enterprise's transporter to return them to their normal ages following their return from the antimatter universe.


Reference TOS "The Cage", "The Menagerie"

Captain Christopher Pike
Played by Jeffrey Hunter
Episode: TOS 016 - The Menagerie, Part I-II

Best known as commanding officer of the U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701, just prior to James Kirk, Pike counted the top-secret first contact with the natives of Talos IV amid his long Starfleet career. Later in life, as a fleet captain aboard the training ship U.S.S. Republic, Pike suffered massive radiation damage after saving several cadets when a baffle plate ruptured in the ship's reactor. Thanks to the unorthodox methods of his former science officer, Spock, in 2266, Pike was returned to Talos IV to live out his life without the debilitating lifestyle he had endured, even with a self-propelled, life-support wheelchair.


Reference TOS the series

James Tiberious Kirk

James T. Kirk
Played by William Shatner
Episode: TOS 002 - Where No Man Has Gone Before


Starfleet Career Summary

2250 — As a first-year Academy student with ensign rank, assigned to U.S.S. Republic NCC-1371

2254 — Upon graduation, promoted to lieutenant and posted to U.S.S. Farragut under Capt. Garrovick

2264 — Promoted to captain, in command of U.S.S. Enterprise for five-year mission

2266 — Exonerated in wrongful death charge of Ben Finney, first captain ever to stand trial

2269 — Returned from five-year mission; promoted to admiral in charge of fleet operations at Earth


OK so we have a long time before the Enterprise from movie XI to TOS to change the way she looks..

she was launched under Captain Robert April in 2245 and then Captain Kirk got her in 2264 That is 19 Years for refits and changes.. that is a long time...  So I won't be surprised if the Movie Enterprise looks different from the TOS Enterprise.

So, if Kirk was assigned to the Republic in his first year of the Academy in 2250 and the movie is showing the Enterprise being built, then the movie is set in 2244 or 2245... approx 5 years before Kirk joins Starfleet Academy.. however Spock should already be in the academy at this time..

Some of the rumors is that Spock from TNG goes back in time and talks to Spock (academy) about Kirk to save Kirks life.. possible from a TNG Romulan assassination attempt on Kirks life pre-academy, thus creating the catalyst to the bond of their friendship.

Since Leonard Nemoy is casted as well.. it is either going to be a flashback story from Spock's point of View, or we have a time travel story again.
"You still don't get it, do you?......That's what he does. That's all he does! You can't stop him! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead!"

Member :
Xenocorp / Dynaverse.net Moderator & Beta Test Team
SFC 4 Project QA Coordinator
Taldren Beta Test Team
14 Degrees East Beta Test Team
Activision Visioneers SFC 3 Beta Test Team

Offline Smiley

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 332
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #30 on: January 24, 2008, 02:19:34 pm »
I actually quite happy that they are making another film - I'm happy to see anything Trek related in-progress, it's great that people are still willing to spend money on it.
My personal preference would have been a film post-Nemesis, but that's just me and my nature. As time has passed I have grown to like TOS little-by-little more . . . I have often wondered what Star Trek would be like if Gene Roddenberry were alive right now and Star Trek was invented and created right now - what would the shows look like created in this age of high technology but with Gene Roddenberry at the helm?

Signature: Terran Empire Relentless: WZ, All Other Models: Smiley

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #31 on: January 24, 2008, 03:34:23 pm »
There's no telling on that. The OS Enterprise was influenced so much by the science fiction of that era. The ship is at heart a flying saucer, would a designer today even base the ship around that? Whether anyone likes to admit it or not, they owe everything to TOS for the very look of Trek.

The core of the series under Gene I don't think would change, TOS and TNG shared that similar "betterment of humanity" theme, it wasn't until his death that the franchise began to focus on ratings, one-uping other shows and ooo look at the pretty boom boom instead of good science fiction.

Anyone think there'd have been a Dominion War with him at the helm?
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Czar Mohab

  • Faith manages.
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 564
  • Gender: Male
  • Chewie - Go jiggle the handle!
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #32 on: January 24, 2008, 04:46:50 pm »
Anyone think there'd have been a Dominion War with him at the helm?

Yes, but handled much differently, possibly as an episode or two, no more, with a similar ending to any TOS episode involving war/combat :D.

Czar "I hope the 'reboot' is enough to get the wife hooked" Mohab
[/color]
US Navy Veteran - Proud to Serve
Submariners Do It Underwater - Nukes Do It Back Aft - Pride Runs Deep
Have you thanked a Vet lately?

Subaru Owners Do It Horizontally Opposed!
Proud Owner - '08 WRX - '03 Baja - '98 Legacy

Offline TheStressPuppy

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 190
  • Gender: Male
    • trekmods.com
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #33 on: January 24, 2008, 07:50:30 pm »
First i want to say i respect everyones opinion here. The last thing i want to do is shove my point of view down anyones throat. I understand the purists fear of change. I was, and still am a purist to a point myself. I am 43 years old. All we had in the 70's was the original series reruns. I marveled at TMP in a movie theater when it was 1st released. Naturally all trek since TMP pretty much stayed TMP style. There was speculation for a long time that TOS was going to get a reboot. The big question was when? I guess the answer is now.

From what i gather from all the rumor control, and articles i have read is that JJ is not out to destroy trek lore (canon). He wants to keep continuity at least as close as possible. I see a passion JJ has for this new trek that we didnt see from berman and braga when they made enterprise. James Cawley from Star trek: New Voyages is in the cast now (what role he is playing i dont know, but it is starfleet). He has been inside, saw the sets, saw the uniforms, the actors in action. etc. etc. He has absolutely nothing but praise for what JJ is doing. Mr Cawley is as purist as a purist can be. Sure there are things he would do different if he was in charge, but this is JJ's vision. JJ's baby.

I have always wondered if TOS was re-filmed today what i would look like. I have wondered that since 2000. Would we use the same ship? How would we enhance it? Would we stay 60's style, or add some TMP elements to it? Would we just scrap the TOS look all together and make a totally new ship? I like how JJ is approaching this question. He seems to be doing the best of both worlds of TOS, and TMP. Some do not agree, and that is ok. How the movie will stand up depends not on its special effects, but on "IF" it has a good story. how well its story is told. How well it is filmed and acted.  After that then the purist can argue canon untill doomsday.

One thing will be certain... I will build this ship when i see the rest of it :D

Offline Centurus

  • Old Mad Man Making Ship Again....Kinda?
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8502
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #34 on: January 24, 2008, 08:06:38 pm »
Stress, if I may call you that, or TSP if you prefer, I agree with your entire post, most especially the part of how well the story is written, and how well the actors perform their roles.  In this situation, they have very big shoes to fill. 

As for the ship, it's too soon to really make any judgements on how she'll be.  Granted, we have some drooling teasers to look at, but nothing major.  Personally, it's too soon to tell how much of the ship has been changed.  For all we know the design is the same, but instead of a smooth hull, it might have more TMP looking hull plates.  Again, personally, I say it's too soon to tell.

My only gripe, and I shall say it again, they should have gotten Gary Sinise to play Bones.  He's an exceptional actor in my opinion.  Very talented and skilled.  He also bears a striking resemblence to DeForest Kelley.  But looks aside, I feel he'd be a better choice to play Bones.  I feel he could capture the personality and mentality of the character.
The pen is truly mightier than the sword.  And considerably easier to write with.

Offline Centurus

  • Old Mad Man Making Ship Again....Kinda?
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8502
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #35 on: January 24, 2008, 08:09:41 pm »
P.S.

When you make the ship, can you make a really high poly model with very high poly textures?   :-D  PWEASE?!??!?!?!?!?!

Centurus
Your friendly D.net Constitution Class whore.
The pen is truly mightier than the sword.  And considerably easier to write with.

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #36 on: January 24, 2008, 08:36:52 pm »
I went through a lot of my posts just to confirm what I'd written and while I consider myself a TOS fan, I've said nothing negative about the movie. I'm looking forward to what they do with the ship, what they do with the characters and most of all what they do with the story. It's all about the story, the rest is just eye candy.

My hopes are they do stay "true" to Trek, whatever that means to anyone. If they want to do a full reboot it's fine by me, I'm a big fan of the Reborn series, just make it it's own Trek and not try and claim it as a rewrite of previous series episodes. Rather than retconning "canon" create a whole new canon.
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Beeblebrox

  • Existential Warfare
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 303
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #37 on: January 24, 2008, 10:10:23 pm »
Quote
He was wrong, he doesn't look right, it was a reset, and to each their own.  I've seen every one of the Bond movies, and I rate him behind George Lazenby.  But that's my own opinion, of an older fan, and you have yours.  You're what that new line of movies needs these days.. I'd still rather have seen more movies with Brosnan in them..

Personally I thought that new Bond was the best one they've had in years.  He took 007 back to his roots as an assassin and gave a realistic performance of what someone in that profession might be like.  Anyone remember that 00 status was meant to be a license to kill?  And can anyone really picture Pierce Brosnan (who I did like in Remington Steele) strangling a crazed African guerilla and still making it back to the poker table?

I think this film is going to be fantastic. TOS, if viewed in a detached way, is terrible. The acting is bad, the sets are awful, the effects are bad... which is to be expected. In my view, it was the movies with TOS cast that really established them in our culture, not the TV series

Quote
*Completely* disagree here.. without the original series going into syndication, we'd not know that much about Star Trek at all.  It was the original series in syndication, plus the cast and stories that established the franchise.  And effects were better than average for that time period.

This is definitely true.  The effects are even more amazing when you consider that Star Trek was made and 3 years before we made it to the moon. 



 
Quote
Ever seen early "Doctor Who"?  That's bad effects and awful sets.. and if you want to see bad acting, watch some of the episodes with William Hartnell (the first Doctor) and watch the companions act.  Or, I should say,"act".  And this is coming from a fan.

These are fighting words.  Please wait for me at September 12th, 1776 in Pennsylvania.  I'm coming to kick ass and reverse the polarity of the neutron flow....and I'm all out of neutrons.


Quote
Shatner was the worst actor of the bunch, mainly because he was so over the top.. and noone had really matched that until Avery Brooks hit the screen..

Total rubbish.  Shatner was brilliant and his energy in the role was one of the big factors in making the show believable.  For further proof of his talent just check out his Twilight Zone appearances.  The Shat managed to make an unconvincing monster costume perched outside an equally unconvincing airliner set one of the most terrifying pieces of television I saw as a kid.

Quote
But it was the original series influence and the fans of that series that gave us a NASA test shuttle named "Enterprise" (before the first Trek movie), and it was that same fan base for that show being so massive that Paramount wanted to try "Phase 2", which spun into the first Trek movie.

It's just a shame they had to remake The Changeling and suck all of the story and tension out of it.  Oh, and they screwed up the Klingons badly.  When I watched the movie as a kid I couldn't figure out who the guys with the foreheads were and I wanted them to get back to the Klingons that seemed to be promised by the 3 D7 cruisers.  I'm still waiting for them to get back to the Klingons.



Quote
I'm willing to give the new movie a chance, but I'll wait until others I trust have seen it first before I spend money on it.

This is pretty much the strategy I follow with every movie.  Oh, and Batman Begins rocked.  Wasn't there an old Batman comic miniseries where he got involved with R'as A Gul and it was revealed that Batman had done some of his early training with R'as?


I've always been leery of this prequel stuff (especially after George Lucas burned us by revealing that Darth Vader was really just a troubled kid who got suckered by a psychological ploy and a series of lies that wouldn't fool a third grader).  I have to agree with some of the posters that it might have been better if they'd just done a movie either with the Enterprise crew or set it after Nemesis.  The idea of seeing some Hollywood pretty boy trying to fill Captain Kirk's boots makes my stomach hurt.
"Out swords and to work with all!"---Cyrano de Bergerac

Offline dragoon

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 759
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #38 on: January 24, 2008, 10:32:45 pm »
@atheorhaven

I guess being a different generation does skew ones view of Trek. I'm 25, so I am more of the Next Gen, even though I grew up watching TOS, and remember the launch and media interest in TNG. My brother was always really afraid of the False Image that Fesarius put onto the view screen, and that left so much of a mark in him that until Stargate and the Asgard, my bro would get freaked out by the "greys".. especially the ones in Communion. ;D

For me, and I get the same vibe from many people, it was the Movies, Especially TWoK that really solidified the whole thing. Though personally it was the Undiscovered Country that i always liked the most, Christopher Plummer was Awsome and i wish I could see him perform Shakespere live. I think that Trek during those movies ( well the even numbered ones ) was where it had it's gretest Impact on the memory. Granted, high budgets etc helped, but it was only really Best of Both worlds and The Final few seasons of DS9 that really hit me the same way for the TV incarnations. For much of the 90's, It was Babylon 5 that was my show of choice, but I never missed an episode of DS9. I never felt compelled to stay in for Voyager Or Enterpise, but for the latter, recordable TV was now an option, so it didn't matter too much. Season 4 of Ent really showed how much TOS meant to people. I was amazed at how excited and happy people were when thoughtful links to the TOS were put in, and I think that season really added to our appreciation of what TOS. The ideas that were apprently in the works for Ent season 5 sounded brilliant.

I still find it hard to understand the "die hards" and their opposition, it seems they Want to hate the movie, rather than see what it's going to be like. I truly think that when I walk into that cinema in December I will see not only a great film, but it will be TOS given the respect and financial support it always deserved. And I hope it will lead to more films and perhaps a TV series.

Also, while the Romulans appear to be the bad guys, it may mean that we get the chance to have the Klingons back as a real threat. No technobabble and miracle solutions to defeating them like the Borg. Just good old fasion enemies that you either have to find common ground with, or Destroy in a fleet battle or with a phasor. Like Kirk wanted to do at Organia.

Hopefully as the film nears release and we know more about it, StarTrek fans of all opinions will rally around and support the film.... and in return we get the Trek we've been desperate for, with good effects, Story and acting.

And no Crack whore T'pol. ;)
God said to the Welsh: 'I am going to give you this glorious land of lakes and mountains.' So where's the catch, asked the Welsh? 'Wait until you see the neighbours,' replied God.

Offline TheStressPuppy

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 190
  • Gender: Male
    • trekmods.com
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #39 on: January 24, 2008, 10:43:59 pm »
I go by "Major Stress" now in other gaming boards. I just keep the old nick here, and on other trek boards to avoid confusion. Cant change it without making a new account.

By going with the mostly "unknown" actors it saves money for more important production aspects. I just gotta see the "Shawn of the Dead" guy pull off Scotty. Another thing here is some are expecting the new actors to "mimic" the original cast. Right down to their flaws. To be brutally honest if i see Chris Pine overact, or mimic Shatner in any way im walking out.... OK maybe not, but ill be very disappointed. I want to see the new guys take on Kirk Spock, and Mccoy. To add their own unique style to the characters. In "New Voyages" the acting sure wont win any academy awards, but the way they put their own style in is good. Give the new guys a chance.


Nope im only gonna make a 500 poly model of the new Big-E :p  J/K Ill do what it takes to pull it off

Offline OlBuzzard

  • renegade
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1759
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #40 on: January 25, 2008, 08:42:20 am »
WOW!  ...

Seems we all have opinions on this matter.  I agree with several of the statements made.  My "final" review is still one of anticipation for the movie.  I plan on keeping in the back of my mind a few things to remember:

1.  No two actors are exactly the same...  the manner in which they deliver their lines, their facial expressions that often say things that words do not !  Sometimes the way they might even "carry themselves".

2.  The same thing is true of writers:  They do not use the same words, charactor development, or other screen dynamics to express the same thoughts or ideas.

That said IMHO as long as the tools that are used by this team that has been assembled to portray this "next" movie (or possible series) is faithful to its origin, cast, and as much as possible, even the design themes of the ships ..  it should be worth seeing. 


It has been stated very well as to the influence of TOS, in all of the successful spinoffs of Trek.  YES even Bill Shatners over acting.  Let's face it ..  like it or not as a star ship captain he was suppose to be "larger than life"  and he fit that like a glove.  Keep in mind that was also what Roddenberry wanted.  Would that be different today?  I think perhaps a better question is "Do we have the right to attempt to re-write history in the light of our perception of the changes in todays technology and political land scape?"

As for how well the script is "done"  (acting etc...  ) the special affects, ship designs ..  etc.  That still remains to be seen.  If they do as good a job as Batman Begins does with the "reboot" concept they should do well.  As for casting:  Some times is not so much the move from one type of charactor (comedy etc) as it is the ability of the individual to make that change.  Some can (and do it very well) ... some just simply can not.

Let's face it ...  a lot of this is all speculation.  For now they have my support and I eagerly await the release.  I will reserve the negative until such time as it is warranted ...  just my thoughts!

If you aim at nothing:  you WILL hit it every time !

Offline Don Karnage

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2327
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #41 on: January 25, 2008, 09:15:15 am »
if tos was remake today is a good question

well since the original enterprise was build in the 60's and the tmp was was made in the 70's making a new enterprise from scratch maybe keeping the idea of warp engines and a saucer would be a interesting idea.

so what the enterprise would look like is a challenge for everyone to think, so sharp you're pencil and start drawing a new ship.

1- the ship have 2 warp engines

2- the ship have a saucer

3- the ship and a main hull

4- don't copy engines and general look of any ship from drawing or model or mod or anything that already somewhere.

so from a new look the constitution class from the tos period what it would look like, the warp engines don't need to be round.



Offline AsYlUm

  • Follow the white rabbit
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 180
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #42 on: January 25, 2008, 09:40:01 am »
Lol... well im too busy with work and everything else, so keep the updates coming fellas... its nice to have a thread here to catch up on this stuff.

P.S.      All trek rocks.. no matter what it is it runs through my veins and i love it all.. ( wouldnt have spent years learning to model space ships otherwise  :D)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD3YBxBlR5E         <-- gagarin video

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #43 on: January 25, 2008, 09:59:05 am »
Are you talking "remake" or is the premise "Trek never existed what would it look like if created today"?

Worlds of difference could be drawn between the two, the biggest being the ships. Flying saucers were big in 60's sci-fi and as a result had a huge impact on the design. I'm glad letting it be an overriding impact was avoided or we'd have that silver saucer concept design.

Looking at other sci-fi it seems a big influence on modern ships was the movie Aliens. Halo, Babylon 5, Homeworld and numerous others have a similar design style for ships as seen in that movie, though I'm not sure what influenced the Aliens ship design. One would also wonder what impact our military equipment would have, items such as the F-22 and F-117 look pretty futuristic as well as the B2 even though it's design style predates TOS.

Key components likely wouldn't even exist, warp drive would probably be replaced with some kind of jump drive, transporters might give way exclusively to shuttles, phasers might be replaced with handguns and rifles and it may be much more military in feel. TOS was inspired by the 18th and 19th centuries. Would a modern creation draw that same inspiration or focus fully on the 20th?
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline atheorhaven

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1801
    • Mare Imbrium Shipyards
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #44 on: January 25, 2008, 10:47:36 am »
Personally I thought that new Bond was the best one they've had in years.  He took 007 back to his roots as an assassin and gave a realistic performance of what someone in that profession might be like.  Anyone remember that 00 status was meant to be a license to kill?  And can anyone really picture Pierce Brosnan (who I did like in Remington Steele) strangling a crazed African guerilla and still making it back to the poker table?

Are you kidding?  Of course I can see Brosnan doing that, and if the gorilla were female, trying to mate with it.  When he came back to the table, he'd smooth his hair, adjust his tie and say,"Sorry about the delay gentleman, I've just pulled out of a hairy situation."
:D

Brosnan does that sort of thing extremely well and makes it smooth.  :)

This is definitely true.  The effects are even more amazing when you consider that Star Trek was made and 3 years before we made it to the moon.

And that's the thing that makes the show so interesting to me.  The foresight that they had when we were still just orbiting people around the planet and had not yet really hit escape velocity with humans yet.  You get the occasional hint of it in the show (like when they refer to a black hole as a "black sun" in Tomorrow is Yesterday) and that makes it all the more amazing to me.  The science was thought of well enough that it inspired a generation of engineers, astronauts, and other geeks to get out there and help bring us that much closer to the future we see in the show.  Right now, I'm typing on a computer that's about the size of a small dishrack, with a flip-style communicator-style phone on my hip and a communicator-style Bluetooth handsfree kit on my ear.  If people really want to see the influence and foresight that TOS had on human society, just think about it the next time that you get coffee from a vending machine, use your cellphone, or walk into your shopping mall and have the doors open in front of you.  *That's* all thanks to TOS..

These are fighting words.  Please wait for me at September 12th, 1776 in Pennsylvania.  I'm coming to kick ass and reverse the polarity of the neutron flow....and I'm all out of neutrons.

'Fraid that I had my Time Hopper taken away, I was using it too much and spending far too much time in the "free love" society of Ancient Greece.  Say what you want to about how decedant they were, but the ladies there knew how to live.  This guy wearing opera clothes showed up, ripped a strip off me talking about chancing damaging the time/space continum through my negligence and repeated visits, pushed me into this big blue box, and exiled me to Canada.  ;)

And if I did go to Pennsylvania around that time, I'd run too much of a chance running into an ancestor.  How about... hmmm, May 17, 1987 in Nassau in the Bahammas?  The American dollar was strong then, and we could spend a fantastic time at one of the beach bars getting bleary eyed on Jamacian rum.  First one to pass out after making an ass of himself loses.  You'll have to drive though..

Total rubbish.  Shatner was brilliant and his energy in the role was one of the big factors in making the show believable.  For further proof of his talent just check out his Twilight Zone appearances.  The Shat managed to make an unconvincing monster costume perched outside an equally unconvincing airliner set one of the most terrifying pieces of television I saw as a kid.

He had his moments, "The Doomsday Machine" and "The Conscience of the King" comes to mind.  But everytime I see "The Paradise Syndrome", my inner child cries a little.  And he was brilliant in the "Twilight Zone".

It's just a shame they had to remake The Changeling and suck all of the story and tension out of it.  Oh, and they screwed up the Klingons badly.  When I watched the movie as a kid I couldn't figure out who the guys with the foreheads were and I wanted them to get back to the Klingons that seemed to be promised by the 3 D7 cruisers.  I'm still waiting for them to get back to the Klingons.

Agreed.. I think that anyone wanting to do Klingons well needs to watch three things:  "Shogun", "Hunt for Red October", and "Gorsky Park".  If you've never watched those, you'll never fully understand Klingons.  And I still miss the original look of the Klingons as well, the foreheads still make it look too much like a novelty condom instead of something believable.  That kind of head ridging should extend onto the face, down the back, and onto places like the hands and knees in a real organism.

This is pretty much the strategy I follow with every movie.  Oh, and Batman Begins rocked.  Wasn't there an old Batman comic miniseries where he got involved with R'as A Gul and it was revealed that Batman had done some of his early training with R'as?

There was.. and that's how he initially met Talia.  Think Neil Adams drew those stories..

I've always been leery of this prequel stuff (especially after George Lucas burned us by revealing that Darth Vader was really just a troubled kid who got suckered by a psychological ploy and a series of lies that wouldn't fool a third grader).  I have to agree with some of the posters that it might have been better if they'd just done a movie either with the Enterprise crew or set it after Nemesis.  The idea of seeing some Hollywood pretty boy trying to fill Captain Kirk's boots makes my stomach hurt.

I look at it as they've finally run out of ideas, and elements of Harve Bennett's "Starfleet Academy" script finally made it to the screen after almost twenty years.  I'm *hoping* for a good movie, I'm *praying* for a good movie, but I'll do the waiting game and wait and see.
..ooOOoo..totally useless information..ooOOoo..

Mare Imbrium Shipyards - http://mareimbrium.webhop.net

Don't bother checking out my website for the most recent updates, because I've
been too lazy to update it!  Check Battleclinic!

Offline Don Karnage

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2327
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #45 on: January 25, 2008, 11:49:45 am »
Are you talking "remake" or is the premise "Trek never existed what would it look like if created today"?

Worlds of difference could be drawn between the two, the biggest being the ships. Flying saucers were big in 60's sci-fi and as a result had a huge impact on the design. I'm glad letting it be an overriding impact was avoided or we'd have that silver saucer concept design.

Looking at other sci-fi it seems a big influence on modern ships was the movie Aliens. Halo, Babylon 5, Homeworld and numerous others have a similar design style for ships as seen in that movie, though I'm not sure what influenced the Aliens ship design. One would also wonder what impact our military equipment would have, items such as the F-22 and F-117 look pretty futuristic as well as the B2 even though it's design style predates TOS.

Key components likely wouldn't even exist, warp drive would probably be replaced with some kind of jump drive, transporters might give way exclusively to shuttles, phasers might be replaced with handguns and rifles and it may be much more military in feel. TOS was inspired by the 18th and 19th centuries. Would a modern creation draw that same inspiration or focus fully on the 20th?


well a was thinking a kinda remake, if startrek was made today what the ship would look like?

you must keep this in mind, the ship have a saucer a main hull and 2 warp engines, how it look like is up to you, but it must be you're creation, not something you copy from any source.

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2894
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #46 on: January 25, 2008, 02:22:06 pm »
Stare Trek also drew on various scientific theories and postulates that had been published in scientific journals, being attempted to be made reality or in their infancy, projected them into the future and predicted that the human race would have figured how to make these theories work after 200 years of research and deveopment.

For example:

Sun-Atomic Impulse Power (1938), a postulate, in which is you can somehow sychronise the sub-atomic impulse of  any two individual elements, you can achieve cold fusion with them. Despite the fact that is should work, nobody has been able to design and create the "Synchroniser" device reuired to make it all happen. Note that the term "Synchronaiser" often pops up when taliking of anything to do with Impulse Engines in Star Trek engine room blah blah.

Phaser (1966) which is a modulated laser beam passed through a polarising filter. Experimented with by the US millitary during the Cold War and has a better range plus energy delivery than a simple pulse laser. The "Hammer Drill" efect of the modulated wave bursts in the long discharge beam pulse causes structural stress to the hit area. This could be tuned to precisely cuase best effect on a material. Disappeared in millitary secrecy and God knows were they are with it now. Over shadowed by the more portable (??) negative image X-Ray pulse laser system.

Disrupter (1960's) On the ground uses atmosphere to transmit a ultra sonic shock wave to a target and literally hake it apart. During early experiments, a group of scientist were accidentally killed in a Dosrupter experiment.  During the mid 1980's Grenada invasion, Cuban troops accused the US of using "Disrupters" and weapons of the same ilk on them, with tales of people having theor bones turned to powder, truck falling apart, etc. In the vacuum of Space a Disrupter needs a transmission medium to relay the shock wave through and Plasma makes an ideal medium.

Warp Drive (1956) a theory by the French mathematician Aubecere that actually works under the current laws of physics and mathematics. In February 1999 NASA's Radical Propulsion Labs made the front page of New Scientist magazine when they announced that they managed to propel a single molecule to light speed and back in one Kilometre, which was the total length of the Warp Engine they'd built. Anyone who understands relativity and the laws of physics relating to it, will know that to travel at the speed of light in conventional space, that an object must have the same mass as a single particle of light (Photon). As a molecule has a mass far in excess sveral billion billion times more than a Photon, it shouldn't even be able to make half light speed. A NASA spokesperson predicted that maybe in another 100 years we might be able to use it to propel very small space probes at FTL speeds. The actual experiment took the equivalent power outputs of three US states total electrical generator outputs.

Transporter / Teleporter (20th century various scources) the Heiscenberger Conumdrum prevents this from happening and also various theories that synergy cannot be transmitted, as in, if you tansport a spiing top, because you can't capture or quantify the synergy, the spinning top will be static when it rematterialises. Foe this reason many scientist believe that using a transporter, if such things were created, would kill animate lifeforms as conciousness cannot be transmitted with the body.

Star Trek TOS tried to keep with the way that science seemed to be going back in the 1960's and avoid Sci-Fi "Handwavium" technology such as "Jump Drives", etc.

The reason Lasers changed to Phasers was originally given to be the latter were publised in the scientific journals in 1966 and they sounded better as "new" technology to Gene, especially if the real Lasers were about to be supercedded by the new Phasers back then.

From a lecture given at my local university by the English guy who designed the "All Good Things" 3 engined Enterprise-D, the Star Trek writers consult NASA a lot about science.
The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #47 on: January 25, 2008, 02:52:26 pm »
Too true. I was referring more to the way in which the show was presented. Aside from everything else TOS was a combination of 18th century high seas exploration and 19th century wild west tales mixed with the world's fascination with all things "outer space" at that moment in history.

If created today there's a good bet it'd look an awful lot like the new BSG.
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2894
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #48 on: January 25, 2008, 02:59:36 pm »
God forbid that it look like BSG!! :o

It just wouldn't have the appeal that is has had for 4 deacdes.

If Trek was made like BSG something would come along that was like Trek and steal the limelight.

I used to like "Space Above And Beyond" which had great potential, war with an unknown alien race where it transpires that Earth is in the wrong, good plots, storylines, etc. so what idiots decided to axe it after one season??

 
The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline OlBuzzard

  • renegade
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1759
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #49 on: January 25, 2008, 03:09:54 pm »
Stare Trek also drew on various scientific theories and postulates that had been published in scientific journals, being attempted to be made reality or in their infancy, projected them into the future and predicted that the human race would have figured how to make these theories work after 200 years of research and deveopment.

For example:

Sun-Atomic Impulse Power (1938), a postulate, in which is you can somehow sychronise the sub-atomic impulse of  any two individual elements, you can achieve cold fusion with them. Despite the fact that is should work, nobody has been able to design and create the "Synchroniser" device reuired to make it all happen. Note that the term "Synchronaiser" often pops up when taliking of anything to do with Impulse Engines in Star Trek engine room blah blah.

Phaser (1966) which is a modulated laser beam passed through a polarising filter. Experimented with by the US millitary during the Cold War and has a better range plus energy delivery than a simple pulse laser. The "Hammer Drill" efect of the modulated wave bursts in the long discharge beam pulse causes structural stress to the hit area. This could be tuned to precisely cuase best effect on a material. Disappeared in millitary secrecy and God knows were they are with it now. Over shadowed by the more portable (??) negative image X-Ray pulse laser system.

Disrupter (1960's) On the ground uses atmosphere to transmit a ultra sonic shock wave to a target and literally hake it apart. During early experiments, a group of scientist were accidentally killed in a Dosrupter experiment.  During the mid 1980's Grenada invasion, Cuban troops accused the US of using "Disrupters" and weapons of the same ilk on them, with tales of people having theor bones turned to powder, truck falling apart, etc. In the vacuum of Space a Disrupter needs a transmission medium to relay the shock wave through and Plasma makes an ideal medium.

Warp Drive (1956) a theory by the French mathematician Aubecere that actually works under the current laws of physics and mathematics. In February 1999 NASA's Radical Propulsion Labs made the front page of New Scientist magazine when they announced that they managed to propel a single molecule to light speed and back in one Kilometre, which was the total length of the Warp Engine they'd built. Anyone who understands relativity and the laws of physics relating to it, will know that to travel at the speed of light in conventional space, that an object must have the same mass as a single particle of light (Photon). As a molecule has a mass far in excess sveral billion billion times more than a Photon, it shouldn't even be able to make half light speed. A NASA spokesperson predicted that maybe in another 100 years we might be able to use it to propel very small space probes at FTL speeds. The actual experiment took the equivalent power outputs of three US states total electrical generator outputs.

Transporter / Teleporter (20th century various scources) the Heiscenberger Conumdrum prevents this from happening and also various theories that synergy cannot be transmitted, as in, if you tansport a spiing top, because you can't capture or quantify the synergy, the spinning top will be static when it rematterialises. Foe this reason many scientist believe that using a transporter, if such things were created, would kill animate lifeforms as conciousness cannot be transmitted with the body.

Star Trek TOS tried to keep with the way that science seemed to be going back in the 1960's and avoid Sci-Fi "Handwavium" technology such as "Jump Drives", etc.

The reason Lasers changed to Phasers was originally given to be the latter were publised in the scientific journals in 1966 and they sounded better as "new" technology to Gene, especially if the real Lasers were about to be supercedded by the new Phasers back then.

From a lecture given at my local university by the English guy who designed the "All Good Things" 3 engined Enterprise-D, the Star Trek writers consult NASA a lot about science.


BINGO!  

As I understand it   ...  one of the reasons that Gene insisted on nacelles in pairs was as a result of "creating the warp field" needed to jump to warp speed in the first place.  If ya want t have some fun read some of the theories in quantum physics and the theory of relativity.  (Essentially the chaotic vs orderly).  Some theorize that the key to solving the reality of "warp drive" could lay in an equation that satisfy both conditions.  It's quite interesting even thought it is all theory at this point in time.  But then again so much of what we see today as factual, was little more than theory ....  some of it not that too long ago!

If you aim at nothing:  you WILL hit it every time !

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #50 on: January 25, 2008, 03:27:59 pm »
God forbid that it look like BSG!! :o

It just wouldn't have the appeal that is has had for 4 deacdes.

If Trek was made like BSG something would come along that was like Trek and steal the limelight.

I used to like "Space Above And Beyond" which had great potential, war with an unknown alien race where it transpires that Earth is in the wrong, good plots, storylines, etc. so what idiots decided to axe it after one season??


SAaB and BSG actually have a huge amount in common. Both are navy in space shows, very militarized, based on carriers, centering heavily on fighter combat, and both had previously fought a war against AI they had created.
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2894
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #51 on: January 25, 2008, 03:48:08 pm »
The fighters were cooler on SAaB!!

Having tracking KEP cannons was a far better and obvious idea than a WW1 concept of try an point the fighter at the target before firing.

Note how SFB and SFC fighters use the same concept.

The fact that the alein enemy was apparently human sized furry and not normally agressive creatures who were fighting off a Terran invasion, as they saw it, was a nice plot twist..... Humans being the bad guys in a war... brilliant.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #52 on: January 25, 2008, 04:00:44 pm »
Humans being the bad guys in a war... brilliant


Well we do have a boatload of experience at it.  :D

Now as to the fighters,  :( more realistic probably, cooler no chance. Nothing matches a Mark II Viper nada.
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2894
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #53 on: January 27, 2008, 12:18:10 am »
Gene based much of the fictional Warp Field theory on his training and knowledeg of radio during his stint as a WW2 bomber WO / Navigator.

A star ship can use a single Warp engine to generate a field, and Star Trek has numerous TV show examples of alien starships that use a single engine.

However, like radio antenna, which the engine nachelles are basically theoretically supposed to operate as, the diameter of the field is larger and can be controlled in length and bredth if it is generated by two emitters.

In radio we use two antenni and a bloody difficult to rig up coaxial cable arrangement refered to as a "Co-Phasing Harness".

The transmitter power to each antenna is shared between the two, but by altering the distance between them, the polarised field, which actually generates the radio waves, can by stretched and manpulated for best effect in certain directions.

18 wheelers use co-phased helical mirror mounts to allow the polarised field generated to be distored so as to push the field into a more circular pattern. A single anteena would tend to create a filed in line with the truck's shape, giving poor signal response from the side directions of the truck.

The same goes for the Warp nachelles in Star Trek.... the distance between the two nachelles determines the shape of the Warp Field for FTL speeds and the Sub-Space field thrown around the ship to reduce apparent mass when propellled by Impulse Power or the Particle Beam Thrusters.

The use of Sub-Space fields to reduce mass to aid sublight drives is pointed out in DS9 by Chief  O'Brien in the "Emissary".

However it had featured in a 1970's TOS shuttle technical manual stating that shuttles have a Sub-Space field emitter belt for exactly the same purpose.... cheating relativity.

I think that it'll be alright with the movie and they won't do a "Lost In Space" movie "Jupiter 2" travesty with the Enterprise.

Remember that J.J.Abrams is running the show and not that mob who were responsible for ENT!!

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline OlBuzzard

  • renegade
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1759
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #54 on: January 28, 2008, 07:55:37 am »
Agreed....

The only thing I would be careful of  (in order to respect Genes work from the beginning) would be the time frame in which the 3rd nacelle would be introduced.  Regardless of how and why Gene decided to insist upon the "pairs" of nacelles the fact is that he did.  The Enterprise is shown with a 3rd nacelle (though done in an "alternately universe setting").  I personally have no problem with it (depending upon the location of the 3rd unit).  IF it were to be used IMHO TNG,DS9, Voyager eras and after fits best.  This compliments the idea of a better understanding and consequent further development of warp drive while still showing respect to the original work that Gene insisted upon with the nacelles in pairs.

Still  when it gets right down to it ..  this is all just sci-fi.  A lot of what we will see will depend upon the writer ....  and of course how well JJ executes the telling of that story.  In any case, as long as respect is shown to the overall theme, history, etc of Trek it should do well.

If you aim at nothing:  you WILL hit it every time !

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2894
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #55 on: January 28, 2008, 06:53:05 pm »
Canon has sourced from fandom before now, as the writers do have to find inspiration from somewhere.

Jackill's Abbe Class PT Destroyer appears in a DS9 episode...... without permission or a credit as I E-mail Erik and told him, which he duly checked out and low and behold, there is an Abbe overtaking the Defiant during an attack.

The Abbe was punlished before the episode was created.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline atheorhaven

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1801
    • Mare Imbrium Shipyards
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #56 on: January 28, 2008, 07:17:15 pm »
.. found elements here and threw all this together.  You'll need PaintShopPro to open this, but here's half of the new bridge console.  :)

Original images are here:
http://trekmovie.com/2008/01/25/jj-abrams-trek-team-fan-chat-transcript-pictures-from-the-set/

I color corrected and enhanced the shot, then added in the original shot to show the lower detail.  And finally added in a shot of the half console, to build a composite, adjustable transparency shot to show different details of the console.

Get it here:
http://www.4shared.com/file/36243790/c2d5b545/new_bridge_shot.html
..ooOOoo..totally useless information..ooOOoo..

Mare Imbrium Shipyards - http://mareimbrium.webhop.net

Don't bother checking out my website for the most recent updates, because I've
been too lazy to update it!  Check Battleclinic!

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2894
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #57 on: January 30, 2008, 11:58:53 am »
Spock as protrayed at various ages, including as a teenager, in ST TMP III "The Search For Spock", as the revitalised Spock went through rapid aging from child to middle aged adulthood.

As Spock was shown as an teenager, Zacary Quinto's portrayal and appearance will have to fit in with this and Nimoy's Spock in "The Cage" episode. They do have some reference points to go on and Quinto will fit as the logcal progression from teenage Spock in ST III.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline Don Karnage

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2327
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #58 on: February 01, 2008, 05:54:47 pm »
sure if these lunatic where doing startrek tos like they do bsg it would be horrible, i was just talking that us we make the constitution class (a mod) that would be the tos, so what the ship would be if "WE" made it think it, a remake can be good but the way the keep remaking it its just bad thinking, what will they do with space 1999?, a moon base and the eagle and the character eeekkk, that would be too weird.

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2894
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: OT: The New Enterprise
« Reply #59 on: February 02, 2008, 02:56:05 pm »
I watched a re-run of Space 1999 this Saturday afternoon, and it is so good with the plots, acting, special effects, etc.

It is a Gerry Anderson production after all, and filmed at Pinewood Studios wherre Star Wars was filmed.

Now if Gerry had been put in charge of he specual eefects by Gene during TOS, well it wouldn't have looked so lame nowadays....

Now if the planets in SFC were as good as the ones in Space 1999 it would be nice.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!