### Topic: Trek 11 Enterprise  (Read 19093 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### MajorRacal

• Posts: 492
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #100 on: November 19, 2008, 06:14:17 pm »
Some more notions to consider... TOS is not entirely Roddenberry's own work... it was the contribution of other artists that made it work when it worked.  The movies are a form of "reboot" and steer quite far from Roddenberry's expressed view of what the Trek universe should be.  Roddenberry's vision is inconsistent, and he essentially used TNG as a platform to "reboot" the entire franchise, and even with that, TNG really only grabbed mainstream success  after others gained control.  He may be the Great Bird of the Galaxy, but Roddenberry himself, has also been the focus of fan displeasure and vitriol for his treatment of the original material, but if he could move on and disregard the past of his own creation, why can't everyone else?

#### OlBuzzard

• Lt. Commander
• Posts: 1759
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #101 on: November 19, 2008, 06:37:26 pm »
Some more notions to consider... TOS is not entirely Roddenberry's own work... it was the contribution of other artists that made it work when it worked.  The movies are a form of "reboot" and steer quite far from Roddenberry's expressed view of what the Trek universe should be.  Roddenberry's vision is inconsistent, and he essentially used TNG as a platform to "reboot" the entire franchise, and even with that, TNG really only grabbed mainstream success  after others gained control.  He may be the Great Bird of the Galaxy, but Roddenberry himself, has also been the focus of fan displeasure and vitriol for his treatment of the original material, but if he could move on and disregard the past of his own creation, why can't everyone else?

I understand that completely.  I really am not trying to be belligerent or so closed minded that I can not agree with change.  However, the man who did developer the first Enterprise model did so with the the expressed approval of Gene Roddenberry.  That said, my entire point is simply this:  Don't throw away the baby in the bath water.  Yes, Trek can use a fresh approach and better stories.  Yes, Paramount has the right to do so as they wish.  Perhaps the one word I'm looking for here is "respect".  Respect for the original series, the cast, the temperaments of the crew  (ie: the Spock / McCoy or other similar charactor relationships) ..   that always made the series what it was.  IMHO you would not have Spock acting like a Vulcan with a misguided since of who he was with sporadic emotional outbursts ...  (due to human/Vulcan conflict).   That would be totally out of charactor.  Within that same context IMHO it is somewhat "out of charactor" for this ship to look as it does.  The poorly developed secondary hull with the pylons shifted to the back as an after thought as to where they should be simply looks out of place.

The other model shown here (though still quite different from TOS)  is at least a viable alternative and would show attention and respect to the original design.

But ... in the end this is only my opinion ..  and I'm quite sure it will be only slightly better than worthless to most in the long run.

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

#### knightstorm

• His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
• Lt. Commander
• Posts: 2091
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #102 on: November 19, 2008, 07:57:27 pm »
If you consider that the Borg have been repeatedly defeated by the crew of a single starship, it undermines the notion that they are such an insurmountable threat that fleets and civilisations should simply fall before them - so I have enough onscreen evidence to question the merit of such a philisophical deviation (which ultimately contradicts Roddenberry's desire to pull away from the militarism of the TMP movies and the FASA material those movies inspired.)

The Enterprise beating the Borg in Best of Both Worlds was a fluke if you consider that after the failure with the deflector dish, everything that could go right for them did.  From the rescue of Picard, to them finding a crippling subroutine that the borg hadn't bothered to restrict.  Personally I think it was a rather sloppy ending to the story, but I guess it was the only way for the writers to get out of the corner they had written themselves into.  As for the Borg being an insurmountable threat, it is stated on screen that the battle of Wolf 359 cost the federation 39 starships, and 11,000 lives.  According to Sisko, the Defiant was developed in the immediate aftermath of the battle.  Then the Dominion show up, and the Federation gets the fire under its feet again.  Federation ships start packing more fire power, and newer starship classes look alot more badd@, with alot less bloat.

I may be wrong, but as far as I'm aware, Abrahms hasn't claimed or denied that STXI is a reboot - that term seems to have come from elsewhere, probably a fan site - what he did say was that this was an attempt to bring the character of the original series to the current generation with an eye to make it feel more real.  As for Abrahms, as a writer, he is perfectly entitled to interpret what has been before to help deliver his story and his vision.  That is a fundament of the right to freedom of expression and artistic licence (a notion that should be more readily appreciated within a modelling board/modding community than it currently appears to be).  Star Trek may be something we all enjoy (and likely for many divergent reasons), but in the end, it is a platform for someone to tell us a story that will hopefully entertain us.  No platform for telling fiction is immutable - indeed, the entertainment industry takes grotesque liberties when dealling with real life events, usually without so much as a whisper of complaint.  As a media consumer, you are entitled not to appreciate his vision, but you can't legitimately dismiss it without taking the time to examine it for yourself thereby making a fully informed judgement.

Writer Robert Orci saying it was not a reboot
http://trekmovie.com/2007/10/08/interview-orci-talks-casting-characters-canon-and-more/

Where paramount's president describes it as a reboot
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20233502_2,00.html

And yes, TROST does have the freedom to corrupt and pervert Star Trek in anyway he sees fit, but I also have the freedom to not spend \$15 to see it in the theaters.  I also have the freedom to look at everything he has released and remark about how it seems to confirm my worst fears, and until he releases something which indicates otherwise, I will not stop criticizing him.

Going back to the model of the Enterprise - it is recognisably a Federation hull - it has all the same basic components as the other Enterprises, so the community abreaction feels completely disprportionate to me.  She may not win many beauty contests, but depending on your aestheic preferences, the same can be said for all the other versions out there and even those fanships people have suggested as preferable alternatives.  In case anyone's actually interested, the TMP version is still my favourite.

I would agree with you that The TMP Enterprise was my favorite, although I do think they eventually managed to find a worthy successor with the E.  I don't know if I speak for everyone else, but the shape of the warp nacelles on the new Enterprise are what worry me the most.  They look like jet engines, and in the teaser, they appeared to have tail fins.  Since the look of the Enterprise kind of sets the whole tone for the story, I'm worried that this means its going to go back towards the overly cheesy flash gordonesque type of sci-fi that Star Trek excplicitly rejected from the beginning.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2008, 08:07:57 pm by knightstorm »

#### Norsehound

• Lt.
• Posts: 578
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #103 on: November 19, 2008, 11:31:48 pm »
From the Orci interview:

Quote
TrekMovie.com: You guys have resisting labels for this film such as remake, reboot, etc….even prequel. Prequel has a pretty basic definition so what is wrong with calling it that?

Roberto Orci: But yet it is not entirely accurate. In some senses it is a prequel, but the word I would use, which is how Damon [Lindelof] describes it, is a re-invigoration or re-vitalization.

(emphasis mine)

The interviewer suggested that the movie is a prequel, but Orci says this isn't an accurate description of what they're doing. They want to keep the iconic 'bones' of the series and not tamper with them too much, which is where the 'prequel' notion comes from. You have the characters more or less the same, but telling a new story with them.

Contrasted to nBSG, which alters the 'bones' of the original series to make a completely different animal that tries to pass under the same name.

#### MajorRacal

• Posts: 492
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #104 on: November 20, 2008, 12:43:51 pm »
Nor am I Dan, although I'm sure my tone may seem otherwise here, (it's been a while since I last saw you around and it's good to know you're still kicking about)... I just get a tad frustrated when I see people jumping to conclusions and working themselves up into a twister based on rumour, speculation, misunderstanding and presumption.  Interestingly, the last two posts reinforce my point that the reboot "lie" hasn't come from Abrahms - so perhaps it'll open the door for others to actually take the time to consider the facts and not simply jump on the bandwagon of percieved wisdom.  But, given the weight of evidence of Human behaviour, I don't think I'll hold my breath for that one.  Besides, I have other things to concentrate on, so perhaps I should bow out and focus on them instead of investing so much time on a single thread.

#### OlBuzzard

• Lt. Commander
• Posts: 1759
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #105 on: November 20, 2008, 04:15:18 pm »
Nor am I Dan, although I'm sure my tone may seem otherwise here, (it's been a while since I last saw you around and it's good to know you're still kicking about)... I just get a tad frustrated when I see people jumping to conclusions and working themselves up into a twister based on rumour, speculation, misunderstanding and presumption.  Interestingly, the last two posts reinforce my point that the reboot "lie" hasn't come from Abrahms - so perhaps it'll open the door for others to actually take the time to consider the facts and not simply jump on the bandwagon of perceived wisdom.  But, given the weight of evidence of Human behaviour, I don't think I'll hold my breath for that one.  Besides, I have other things to concentrate on, so perhaps I should bow out and focus on them instead of investing so much time on a single thread.

Nah ..  dont bow out.  We all have our opinions on the matter.  In the end only that of Paramount will matter any ways.  I had hopped that in the end a little bit more respect had been used in the development of the new Enterprise.  IMHO if someone who was not connected directly with Paramount can developer a respectable model  ..   so can Paramount.

As for the movie itself  I plan on seeing it.

Just one other thought and I'll be done ..  We need to keep in mind that this is still PRE TOS and not the "final" TOS ship we are looking at.  It is still within the realm of possibility to get that happy median for a reboot  (IF they are really looking at it) ..  that would be to everyones satisfaction.  I say that tung and cheek since the simple fact is that some will gripe regardless.  ME PERSONALLY ....   if Paramount used something similar to the other ship that was illustrated in this thread .. that would be really cool.

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

#### knightstorm

• His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
• Lt. Commander
• Posts: 2091
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #106 on: November 20, 2008, 07:16:16 pm »
Nor am I Dan, although I'm sure my tone may seem otherwise here, (it's been a while since I last saw you around and it's good to know you're still kicking about)... I just get a tad frustrated when I see people jumping to conclusions and working themselves up into a twister based on rumour, speculation, misunderstanding and presumption.  Interestingly, the last two posts reinforce my point that the reboot "lie" hasn't come from Abrahms - so perhaps it'll open the door for others to actually take the time to consider the facts and not simply jump on the bandwagon of percieved wisdom.  But, given the weight of evidence of Human behaviour, I don't think I'll hold my breath for that one.  Besides, I have other things to concentrate on, so perhaps I should bow out and focus on them instead of investing so much time on a single thread.

Abrams is the producer and director of the film.  Don't you think Orci would have consulted him before the interview to determine what aspects of the film he wanted released to the public.  Also understand something, it could be possible that outside of what I've complained about, the film is a good one that's true to the name Star Trek, however, in the court of my opinion, Abrams is guilty until proven innocent, and until he releases something which alleviates my concerns, I will not quietly sit back and smile.

#### Spartan159

• Posts: 29
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #107 on: November 28, 2008, 09:13:02 pm »
one of the things I like about series (be it Star Wars, Star Trek, Lord of the Rings or whatever) is the continuity. Any universe that is well done and "consistant" with other works done in said universe appeals to me.  In this particular situation, the various ships of TOS, TMP, TNG etc etc looked to me like "Yeah, I can see that evolution..." Minor cosmetic changes are no big deal to me.  Pike's TOS Enterprise interiors to Kirk's TOS Enterprise to TMP Enterprise to TNG Enterprises... evolved but in a way that made sense to me.

Personally I preferred the TMP look.  C and D enterprise.. bleh... E and Voyager I could work with.  With this ST-XI they took the TMP  saucer and mated it with a secondary hull that makes NO sense to me other than to evoke some 50's fin car look and warp drives that look like hood ornaments.  How is this supposed to evolve over time to the ship Pike and Kirk commanded in TOS?  They did not use shuttles or something?  My point being that they did not even attempt to fit into the continuity, canon.  And that is why it upsets me.  Want more action, gratuitous more modern details etc? Fine, but the basic hull shape was fine, the corridors were fine, the bridge layout was fine.  Sure, add buttons, panels, compartments, screens whatever.  But why totally redesign it?

#### Darkseid

• Posts: 272
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #108 on: November 29, 2008, 06:17:44 pm »
It seems this Movie isn't a "Reboot".  It's true that they might mess with bits of Canon, but TNG, DS9, VOY and I'll assume ENT, will not be affected by this new movie.  In fact Abrams, Kurtzman and Orci are coming out with a Comic in Janurary that will bridge the time travel gap between this film and Nemesis.

Basically it's a post Nemesis comic explaining what's happening with Old Spock, and explains the origin of Nero.  Picard and the crew of the Enterprise-E are involved naturally.  I know in a traditional sense, comics aren't part Trek Canon, but since it is supposed to be a prequel to the new film, I'm going to assume Paramount considers this Canon.

I also have two theories about Nero's Ship.  It clearly doesn't look Romulan so it could be either a Reman mining ship, or a Klingon mining ship.  The ship is made to drill so it has got to be a mining ship, but whether or not it's a Reman or Klingon design is based on Nero's origin.  I'm not sure what that origin is yet, but if he is a Post Nemesis Villain he could have stolen it from the Reman's because it could have been used to Mine Dilitium on Remus.  But I also heard a rumor that he escapes Klingon imprisonment which could mean he stole it from the mines of Rura Penthe.  You never know though, it could be something different entirely.
"Humanity's homeworld had withstood centuries of attempts at self-destruction, but soon the aliens would amass a fleet and make all their struggles moot."

#### Cromwell

• Posts: 34
• Gender:
• These are the voyages...
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #109 on: December 21, 2008, 12:48:10 am »
I read through the first page and couldn't go any further. So for that I will start off by apologizing to everyone being sensible. That said, this is childish. A few pictures of the new design and there are some who won't even give it a chance. I hope then that this goes the way of transformers and drives all the unforgiving fans who just want to live in a bubble of the past away and attracts a new generation who might appreciate it. Lets face facts, this is it. The last two movies barely turned a profit. The fandom was/is dying. The general fans just don't care anymore and only the hardcore fans are left. They had to take a chance if they were going to make people interested again. If you can't appreciate their attempt to save your fandom, then you don't deserve it.

I only logged to see what the community had to offer about the new movie, I'm sad to see this was it. I'm out.

#### Centurus

• Bow before the power of my rubber chickens!!!
• Captain
• Posts: 8490
• Gender:
• Master of the Rubber Chicken!!!
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #110 on: December 21, 2008, 12:55:09 am »
I read through the first page and couldn't go any further. So for that I will start off by apologizing to everyone being sensible. That said, this is childish. A few pictures of the new design and there are some who won't even give it a chance. I hope then that this goes the way of transformers and drives all the unforgiving fans who just want to live in a bubble of the past away and attracts a new generation who might appreciate it. Lets face facts, this is it. The last two movies barely turned a profit. The fandom was/is dying. The general fans just don't care anymore and only the hardcore fans are left. They had to take a chance if they were going to make people interested again. If you can't appreciate their attempt to save your fandom, then you don't deserve it.

I only logged to see what the community had to offer about the new movie, I'm sad to see this was it. I'm out.

Just because quite a few of us hate the new ship, doesn't mean we didn't have open minds about the movie.  When they announced the movie would deal with time travel, alot of us kept open minds.  When images of the new interiors came out, most of us still kept an open mind.

Your post is nothing more than an attempt to start another flame war yet again.  For you to say the rest of us don't deserve Trek, and hope we're driven away, you just prove you're just as undeserving as those you accuse.

This thread should just be closed to prevent more people from doing this.
The pen is truly mightier than the sword.  And considerably easier to write with.

#### knightstorm

• His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
• Lt. Commander
• Posts: 2091
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #111 on: December 21, 2008, 01:05:45 am »
I read through the first page and couldn't go any further. So for that I will start off by apologizing to everyone being sensible. That said, this is childish. A few pictures of the new design and there are some who won't even give it a chance. I hope then that this goes the way of transformers and drives all the unforgiving fans who just want to live in a bubble of the past away and attracts a new generation who might appreciate it. Lets face facts, this is it. The last two movies barely turned a profit. The fandom was/is dying. The general fans just don't care anymore and only the hardcore fans are left. They had to take a chance if they were going to make people interested again. If you can't appreciate their attempt to save your fandom, then you don't deserve it.

I only logged to see what the community had to offer about the new movie, I'm sad to see this was it. I'm out.

I'm sorry you had to be an Abrams whore.  The last few films did poorly because they strayed from what made Star Trek great.  This is not an attempt to save Star Trek.  Its an attempt to turn it into something its not, and if I have a choice of seeing it die, and seeing it raped by Abrams I will choose the former.  I am praying that this film will be a flop so Viacom will drop this idiocy.

#### intermech

• Guest
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #112 on: December 21, 2008, 06:53:08 pm »
I think that most of us are ready for a new and fresh version of TOS. I understand the movie to be an attempt to sum the spirit of STAR TREK into one, action-packed event. I am looking forward to it. I think that what Cromwell is missing is that most of us do not think that this new version of the ship fits the spirit of Trek.

Who are we to comment? hmm. . .

We are the core of the starship design and modeling community, while not always in the spotlight, we have been here since the first SFC making new ships, adhering to, and respecting the canon of the Star Trek Universe. Several of us have gone on to professionally program and model for the franchise in some way, shape, or form. All of us have put in lots of time and effort into our work, mostly non-pay, which has served to forward the popularity of Star Trek even during gaps when there has been no movies or shows. We have helped to extend the playability of games that no one would have looked at twice if it was not for the Star Trek name on them. We know what makes a ship look good, we know what makes one look not so good, and a huge part of our evaluation of designs has to do with design flow in light of what we have seen on the TV and silver screens.  Some people around here spend years on a masterpiece, gathering input from fellow fans and with every move of the mouse considering the fine details which make a good design.
After all of this, we waited with bated breath to see a redesign which would attribute as much respect to established canon as we have, only to find that some "professional" designer, fan or not, whipped up this monstrosity in maybe a few weeks or months, when there are DOZENS of potential designs made by fans that would have far better served the purpose, and appealed to all fans, both lay and diehard. If you read this thread, you will see we are commenting on some of the most obvious problems with proportion and alignment. We don't want something that is going to "change what we know" we want something that is going to add to what we know.
If there is one place to discuss the design of a new Star Trek ship, to critique the details, to make recommendations, and say what we would like to see, IT IS HERE at the Dynaverse modeling forum. You will never find another community like it. Look at any other design on this forum, they are treated the same way.

PS, I appriciate all of you guys (and gals) and what you have contributed to my imagination! Merry Christmas.

#### Vipre

• Commander
• Posts: 3105
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #113 on: December 21, 2008, 08:36:19 pm »
Well said IM.
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."

#### Atolm-Rising

• Lt.
• Posts: 658
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #114 on: December 22, 2008, 10:53:41 am »
I cannot beleive this is still on pg1...lol
The point that all of you guys who don't like the design(and you have a right to do so) seem to miss, is that its all relative.
One person's garbage, is another's masterpiece.
You don't have to like it; But to call it a monstrosity, bastardprise, etc... is pointless, not to mention tactless.
So just as you guys would be offended if it was your hardwork that went into something that everyone pissed on, keep in mind the silent person who designed this ship.  So yeah hate it...But don't say it looks like crap just because it doesn't agree with your vision of what the ship and show is supposed to be.

Klingon Kristmas to all you, and to all Qa'Pla!

#### marstone

• Because I can
• Commander
• Posts: 3014
• Gender:
• G.E.C.K. - The best kit to have
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #115 on: December 22, 2008, 12:29:56 pm »
I cannot beleive this is still on pg1...lol
The point that all of you guys who don't like the design(and you have a right to do so) seem to miss, is that its all relative.
One person's garbage, is another's masterpiece.
You don't have to like it; But to call it a monstrosity, bastardprise, etc... is pointless, not to mention tactless.
So just as you guys would be offended if it was your hardwork that went into something that everyone pissed on, keep in mind the silent person who designed this ship.  So yeah hate it...But don't say it looks like crap just because it doesn't agree with your vision of what the ship and show is supposed to be.

Klingon Kristmas to all you, and to all Qa'Pla!

well, I don't think you get the depth of what is said.  I have said it about people designs before, I don't like it, but I usually say it like this.

Awesome looking ship.  Doesn't fit the design style I like, but a great ship none the less.

That is my feelings about the new Ent.  The model work is awesome, visually a great ship.  The design I don't like.  The travel thing and the minor messing with the timeline wouldn't have made the ship turn out so different from the historical design.  A ship of this magnitude would have been on the drawing board for a long time (heck even our wet navy ships takes 20 years or more to go from blueprints to water).

That said, I am giving the movie a chance (might be a rental when I watch it, but I will give it a chance).  As for the next generation coming up who this show is suppose to be targeted towards (a person like my son, 16 years old) he has told me a negative on the ship so far.  But that can change when you see it  If the show is done well (something ST movies haven't done as of late) I can look past the cosmetics.  How many times has Batman got a new car in each remake.    Fans are a bit more entrenched on ST I guess, but time will tell.
The smell of printer ink in the morning,
Tis the smell of programming.

#### Centurus

• Bow before the power of my rubber chickens!!!
• Captain
• Posts: 8490
• Gender:
• Master of the Rubber Chicken!!!
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #116 on: December 22, 2008, 04:57:41 pm »
I cannot beleive this is still on pg1...lol
The point that all of you guys who don't like the design(and you have a right to do so) seem to miss, is that its all relative.
One person's garbage, is another's masterpiece.
You don't have to like it; But to call it a monstrosity, bastardprise, etc... is pointless, not to mention tactless.
So just as you guys would be offended if it was your hardwork that went into something that everyone pissed on, keep in mind the silent person who designed this ship.  So yeah hate it...But don't say it looks like crap just because it doesn't agree with your vision of what the ship and show is supposed to be.

Klingon Kristmas to all you, and to all Qa'Pla!

It's not really tactless.  None of us are trying to exert our opinions as fact.  And it's no less different than people calling the NX the Akiraprise, or is it the Akira being called the Akiraprise.  I can't remember.

Alot of people hate the designs just because they don't like it.

Alot of us hate the new Enterprise, and I personally feel it is a bastardprise, because I feel it doesn't begin to live up to what Trek has been.  It's a major let down to a great many of us.  To comment that our opinions are tactless and assume that we pay no respect to the work put into the model is incorrect, and you're wrong for assuming so, unless you know for a fact otherwise, which you don't.

The pen is truly mightier than the sword.  And considerably easier to write with.

#### OlBuzzard

• Lt. Commander
• Posts: 1759
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #117 on: December 22, 2008, 07:41:03 pm »
I cannot beleive this is still on pg1...lol
The point that all of you guys who don't like the design(and you have a right to do so) seem to miss, is that its all relative.
One person's garbage, is another's masterpiece.
You don't have to like it; But to call it a monstrosity, bastardprise, etc... is pointless, not to mention tactless.
So just as you guys would be offended if it was your hardwork that went into something that everyone pissed on, keep in mind the silent person who designed this ship.  So yeah hate it...But don't say it looks like crap just because it doesn't agree with your vision of what the ship and show is supposed to be.

Klingon Kristmas to all you, and to all Qa'Pla!

It's not really tactless.  None of us are trying to exert our opinions as fact.  And it's no less different than people calling the NX the Akiraprise, or is it the Akira being called the Akiraprise.  I can't remember.

Alot of people hate the designs just because they don't like it.

Alot of us hate the new Enterprise, and I personally feel it is a bastardprise, because I feel it doesn't begin to live up to what Trek has been.  It's a major let down to a great many of us.  To comment that our opinions are tactless and assume that we pay no respect to the work put into the model is incorrect, and you're wrong for assuming so, unless you know for a fact otherwise, which you don't.

I agree Centurus ..  While I personally believe that the NX-1 is a good idea and treated fairly the original series  (by that I mean it complimented it as opposd to take away from TOS designs) ..   this new "movie" version is more like a 57 Buick meets Buck Rogers  ( the 1930's version at that ) with a Star Trek application.  Centurus is also correct that this seems to be more of a let down ...  It is also true that it appears to be a hodge-podge of ideas thrown togeather.

I.M. has offered one of the better assessments so far.  Many good statements have been made ..   but his is perhaps one of the better ones.

IF we were all dead set against ANY redesign of the Enterprise then none of us would have approved of this:

http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=163383952.0;id=16872;image

just to make sure that no one misunderstands ...   I will prefface my remaining remarks with "IMHO"  this "remake" or "redesign" of the Enterprise is much better in that it at least shows some tactful respect to the original designs and those who started the series.

Anyone here remember the episode " A Piece of the Action"?    What was the one thing that Kirk was not capable of?  (just thought I'd throw that out for free)

Do I expect another exact reproduction of Trek as it was in the old days?  NO!  I would think by now technology would have advanced enough to allow better story telling and a more exciting way to convey that story.  BUT by that some token there is something to be said about showing respect to the auto of a design, or  a book or as in this case an entire series.

Here  (once again ) is an attempt by someone to redesign with an attitude of fair treatement to TOS ...

http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=163383952.0;id=16872;image

The new movie version is seriously lacking when compared to this model.
If you aim at nothing:  you WILL hit it every time !

#### Atolm-Rising

• Lt.
• Posts: 658
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #118 on: December 22, 2008, 08:13:56 pm »
I cannot beleive this is still on pg1...lol
The point that all of you guys who don't like the design(and you have a right to do so) seem to miss, is that its all relative.
One person's garbage, is another's masterpiece.
You don't have to like it; But to call it a monstrosity, bastardprise, etc... is pointless, not to mention tactless.
So just as you guys would be offended if it was your hardwork that went into something that everyone pissed on, keep in mind the silent person who designed this ship.  So yeah hate it...But don't say it looks like crap just because it doesn't agree with your vision of what the ship and show is supposed to be.

Klingon Kristmas to all you, and to all Qa'Pla!

It's not really tactless.  None of us are trying to exert our opinions as fact.  And it's no less different than people calling the NX the Akiraprise, or is it the Akira being called the Akiraprise.  I can't remember.

Alot of people hate the designs just because they don't like it.

Alot of us hate the new Enterprise, and I personally feel it is a bastardprise, because I feel it doesn't begin to live up to what Trek has been.  It's a major let down to a great many of us.  To comment that our opinions are tactless and assume that we pay no respect to the work put into the model is incorrect, and you're wrong for assuming so, unless you know for a fact otherwise, which you don't.

My statements all stem from the Facts of this thread.
but the main thing remains... the lack of respect.  That is my gripe throughout this thread.  and "Akiraprise" and "bastardprise" all prove the tactlessness theme of this thread.
So If you guys mean something other than what you write, you should write that.

#### Norsehound

• Lt.
• Posts: 578
• Gender:
##### Re: Trek 11 Enterprise
« Reply #119 on: December 22, 2008, 10:44:50 pm »
In my opinion, the 'Akiraprise' is justified of the name because it was pretty clear NX-01 was a modification of the Akira model (Which was the most popular of the First Contact 'new' ships). This is a highlight of a trend in TNG to re-use models without consideration for continuity. That 'Romulan Drone Ship' from Enterprise wasn't only a re-use of the 'Flea ship' from Voyager, but also didn't follow on traditional Romulan hallmarks- other than the color. Nacelles from the "Romulan BOPs" from ENT appear to have originated from Dominion vessels.

I see people claiming the Trek 11 Enterprise is just "The TMP saucer" with new parts, but I think the only things the new saucer shares with the TMP one are the gridwork and the phaser points. The bridge seems to have more in common with the original than the TMP bridge, and there's no underside curve to the primary hull. Abrams clearly wants the 'bare metal, white' look from the -A, but it seems he's infusing a 'Retro 60s' and 'iPod' look in with the design.