test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
The Defense of Mr. Abrams' Enterprise
captaincorvoe
Member Posts: 0 Arc User
The Constitution says one has the right to a defense attorney, so here goes. 
I'm a new age Trek fan, one of the few. I try to explain to my friend the appeal of Star Trek, but they just don't get it..I stand alone. I respect and love the old canon shows, but at the same time, I have been pampered by the Hollywood witchcraft called CGI, displayed so childishly in movies like Avatar, Transformers 1-3, and Pacific Rim (giant Rock'em Sock'em robots....really?). Go back and look at Gene Roddenberry's original 1966 U.S.S. Enterprise, NCC-1701, Constitution Class. Study her, remember her glorious moments, her defeats, victories, sacrifices etc. etc. Now, go out side and look at you mini-van..or coupe, sedan, convertible. If you put warp nacelles on a Prius, it would look more 2255 than the original enterprise. Gene Roddenberry was a genius, but he was genius handicapped by his own time period. The Space Shuttle looks like it could out run the old connie! If J.J. Abrams had put that ship on the big screen, just touching up the looks, not changing the design, it would have been a comedy, and probably a worse failure than poor Nemesis.
Gene Roddenberry had no way of knowing what the year 2255 would look like, he had to base his knowledge off what he saw in the 1960's. We passed the look of Mr. Roddenberry's 2255 in the early 90's. J.J. Abrams had to step into Roddenberry's shoes, and create a future that looked, futuristic, fortunately, he was able to do this in what Roddenberry would consider the future. The Original Series, no matter how good, just doesn't look like the 23rd century, J.J. Abrams had to make something that did. I think he did a marvelous job.
Star Trek needed a face lift like a fly needs swatting. A reboot needs to look like a reboot, not a rehash. No matter what your opinion on her is, the New Enterprise looks like a starship from the future! Swept lines, organic nuances, white washed hallways, a bridge built by Apple, and a window splashed with all sorts of HUD information. Today, that is considered futuristic. The nacelles are large and bulky, giving them a sense of crucial functionality, but are graceful and advanced in appearance next to the long metal tubes of her 1966 grandmother. The engineering deck looks like a place where engineers engineered stuff. In pretty much every other series, it was one room. Running lights are becoming more and more prevalent (shoutout to everyone's favorite trendsetter Audi), Enterprise is now adorned with remarkable accent lights, giving her a majestic yet conservative presence that captures the ship's size(s) and technological superiority.
I have nothing against the original enterprise, it was the one that started it all, but she was made in 1966, and its 2013 now. The law actually states she's an antique. The Abrams Enterprise is a fresh take on Starfleet and is a design that we can all look at and say, "wow, that looks futuristic, I wish I lived in 2255!" We no longer get that affect with the original enterprise, no matter how much we want it to. No take your rightful place in the Trek Hall of Fame 66' Enterprise, you will always be remembered as the one who started it all, but time has taken its toll. The new Enterprise has arrived, big, mean, sexy, and ready to make Star Trek look like the science fiction adventure it was when it began, weird neck, nacelles, and all. That's my two cents, thanks for the read and any feed back!
I'm a new age Trek fan, one of the few. I try to explain to my friend the appeal of Star Trek, but they just don't get it..I stand alone. I respect and love the old canon shows, but at the same time, I have been pampered by the Hollywood witchcraft called CGI, displayed so childishly in movies like Avatar, Transformers 1-3, and Pacific Rim (giant Rock'em Sock'em robots....really?). Go back and look at Gene Roddenberry's original 1966 U.S.S. Enterprise, NCC-1701, Constitution Class. Study her, remember her glorious moments, her defeats, victories, sacrifices etc. etc. Now, go out side and look at you mini-van..or coupe, sedan, convertible. If you put warp nacelles on a Prius, it would look more 2255 than the original enterprise. Gene Roddenberry was a genius, but he was genius handicapped by his own time period. The Space Shuttle looks like it could out run the old connie! If J.J. Abrams had put that ship on the big screen, just touching up the looks, not changing the design, it would have been a comedy, and probably a worse failure than poor Nemesis.
Gene Roddenberry had no way of knowing what the year 2255 would look like, he had to base his knowledge off what he saw in the 1960's. We passed the look of Mr. Roddenberry's 2255 in the early 90's. J.J. Abrams had to step into Roddenberry's shoes, and create a future that looked, futuristic, fortunately, he was able to do this in what Roddenberry would consider the future. The Original Series, no matter how good, just doesn't look like the 23rd century, J.J. Abrams had to make something that did. I think he did a marvelous job.
Star Trek needed a face lift like a fly needs swatting. A reboot needs to look like a reboot, not a rehash. No matter what your opinion on her is, the New Enterprise looks like a starship from the future! Swept lines, organic nuances, white washed hallways, a bridge built by Apple, and a window splashed with all sorts of HUD information. Today, that is considered futuristic. The nacelles are large and bulky, giving them a sense of crucial functionality, but are graceful and advanced in appearance next to the long metal tubes of her 1966 grandmother. The engineering deck looks like a place where engineers engineered stuff. In pretty much every other series, it was one room. Running lights are becoming more and more prevalent (shoutout to everyone's favorite trendsetter Audi), Enterprise is now adorned with remarkable accent lights, giving her a majestic yet conservative presence that captures the ship's size(s) and technological superiority.
I have nothing against the original enterprise, it was the one that started it all, but she was made in 1966, and its 2013 now. The law actually states she's an antique. The Abrams Enterprise is a fresh take on Starfleet and is a design that we can all look at and say, "wow, that looks futuristic, I wish I lived in 2255!" We no longer get that affect with the original enterprise, no matter how much we want it to. No take your rightful place in the Trek Hall of Fame 66' Enterprise, you will always be remembered as the one who started it all, but time has taken its toll. The new Enterprise has arrived, big, mean, sexy, and ready to make Star Trek look like the science fiction adventure it was when it began, weird neck, nacelles, and all. That's my two cents, thanks for the read and any feed back!
Vice Admiral Onyx Corvoe
U.S.S. Bandersnatch
Chimera Class Heavy Destroyer
"Bander"-Leader. "snatch"-To Kill
"The Jaws that Bite, the Claws that Catch"
U.S.S. Bandersnatch
Chimera Class Heavy Destroyer
"Bander"-Leader. "snatch"-To Kill
"The Jaws that Bite, the Claws that Catch"
Post edited by captaincorvoe on
0
Comments
The new ship is just like the new movies...JJ tries to skim the "coolness" out of the rest of the franchise to gather fans and then delivers a final product that is high on CGI but low on substance. Both clearly appeal to the visual senses but leave the mind dull and yearning for something more.
Oh, BTW.. Gene had no idea what the future looked like..and neither do you, I, or JJ. JJs Apple Store Bridge may not be what the future looks like either. At least Gene was original and used his imagination
(They still need to shrink those doggone bunny-ear nacelles though. They've had plenty of opportunity to do so.)
Number two: 22nd Century Excursion Jackets
Number three: Handheld communicator animation for non-combadge uniforms
Once again, the original series was written and shot in a different time, a lot of what happened in the original series is no longer valid today, hence the devilishly clever alternate reality situation. The Original series was deep in many controversial issues, and advocated for a much more tolerant society, a lot like the one we live in today. Much of those deep issues have been resolved over time. Our society today is much closer to what Roddenberry had in mind than the 1960's society was. I really didn't get the feeling from either movie that the entire movie was effect driven. Sure the effects were awesome, but just because the bad guy has one motive that everybody knows about, doesn't necessarily mean its a paper then plot. Same thing with Into Darkness, Khan was played wonderfully by Cumberbatch, and I thought that he was a very deep character given the circumstances involving his crew.
Thats basically what i was saying, he had no idea what the future would look like, so he had to base it off what he knew and saw from the 60's. I'm not saying JJ's future is correct either, but when we compare the two, which one looks more futuristic? JJ had to use his imagination as well, no doubt he drew inspiration from Apple stores. I'm sure Gene drew inspiration from something too. Its hard to be truly original with a series with such a well defined story line and history. You can't stray too far or else it just isn't Star trek
U.S.S. Bandersnatch
Chimera Class Heavy Destroyer
"Bander"-Leader. "snatch"-To Kill
"The Jaws that Bite, the Claws that Catch"
I would love to hear Abrams' justification for making the nacelles so large. Sometimes I feel like the only person in the world who thinks they look cool! I agree with your first statement entirely, and that's what the new Enterprise does, It's more plausible (to me at least) because I'm viewing that universe from 2013, instead of 1966. Once again I agree with the idea about emotions. There's certainly a sense of awe coupled to the new Enterprise
U.S.S. Bandersnatch
Chimera Class Heavy Destroyer
"Bander"-Leader. "snatch"-To Kill
"The Jaws that Bite, the Claws that Catch"
captaincorvoe: How old are you?
I know at first glance that question might not seem relevant, but it many many ways that's extremely relevant. I'm guessing teens/early twenties.
Personally i'm 32, I grew up watching TNG, but being a lover of sci-fi in general watched many different sci-fi shows and experienced the different progressions of ships designs where some shows took a more organic approach to ship designs. Whereas the younger generations right from the beginning have been exposed to more organic designs since they grew up, yet the older generations grew up with very mechanical, utilitarian designs.
I think in a lot of ways age plays much more on how people perceive old vs new designs of something so established as the Enterprise and that is the point I was attempting to make/verify.
As far as the oversized nacelles...here's my guess.
Since it's an earlier warp capable ship and they haven't really nailed down high efficiency, Oversized intake manifolds (Bussard collectors) ,compression stage (where the nacelle starts to thin out a bit), Finally ending with a compression exhaust manifold.
The oversized starship part bit has been there since the Excelsior was first shown, I believe the term Pregnant Guppy was thrown around.
Then with TNG, the D's saucer was too big. So, when I hear people about starship part too big, I say give it time. Personally, I hated the Intrepid for the first few seasons of Voyager, the ship looked stubby and the triangular saucer put me off.
Actually, the TOS Constitution is older than the new Constitution by like ten years.
So what you're saying is JJ stole Cryptics interiors or the other way around?
original join date 2010
Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
Besides at least they didn't use that god awful Planet of the Titans Enterprise design.
I agree. The refit is definitely my favorite Star Trek ship.
Probably because that's really what I grew up on. I watched all of TOS as a kid and it's my favorite of the series, but the original movies are really what made me a Trekkie.
To me, every other Starfleet vessel that isn't the original movie Enterprise seems off to me, so the new one doesn't bother me any more than the others.
I loved the original Enterprise, loved the refit, thought the Galaxy-class looked horribly ungainly, and am still kind of meh about the Sovereign-class. And the only problems I have with the newest iteration are a) it was apparently built on Earth, not in orbit (why???), and b) they didn't explain in the movie why there were these huge water pipes running around - I had to explain that one myself (secondary coolant for the warp reactor, which is good, because the design in TNG was always spraying warp coolant all over Engineering). Why is there all this piping anyway? Well, who's to say it wasn't there in the original? That engineering hull was huge, and all we ever saw of it were the shuttle bay and the control room for the warp drive. For all we know, all the rest of it looked like a steampunk fan's wet dream.
(Speaking of ship classes, was that a stealth pun in the first post, about "the Constitution"?
Yeah but it does have a cavernous interior and we've not seen the windows from the inside, have we? They could all be 15 feet tall rather than the typical waist height windows from before.
I like the new enterprise in the JJ movies. But this comment above doesn't work for me. There's no friction in space. So aerodynamic design isn't really going to do anything in the context of going fast.
Parallels: my second mission for Fed aligned Romulans.
As for the pipes, do you know what deuterium is? It's water. How do you move water? Pipes.
Hmm, does that mean there are pipes carrying antideuterium?
DeltaFox
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
U.S.S. Bandersnatch
Chimera Class Heavy Destroyer
"Bander"-Leader. "snatch"-To Kill
"The Jaws that Bite, the Claws that Catch"
it's not just that its oversized, it's that it doesn't look oversized. I know that probably doesn't make much sense, but they just blew it up without changing the details to match the new size. I'm sorry, but the "they made the windows bigger" defense doesn't hold water, nor does the supposition that they must have added additional decks between said window rows to make them fit.
By the way, why does the ship need 8 torpedo tubes on each side of the engineering hull? Obviously they aren't supposed to be the same as the torpedo bay on the neck.
I know and understand what you are saying. I am 40 and lived off of TOS growing up. I don't have too much of a problem with the JJ 'prise with exception of a few things:
1) Blindness by lens flare, self explanatory.
2) Brewery for an engineering department, just about any other previous iteration of an engine room looked better to me
3) Its way too big, it should have been much closer in proportion to the Connie's of TOS. Movies etc.
I don't mind the nacelles so much, but the proportions of the dorsal, the engineering hull... it's all wrong, in a way that pushes the new ship into the Uncanny Valley for me.
(And as I said from the moment I saw the first trailer, "Font's wrong." Maybe that 1960s USAF typeface isn't cool anymore, but... meh. The whole thing put together makes me think, "You haven't actually seen any of the original series, have you?")
Water is composed of hydrogen and oxygen, in a ratio of two atoms of hydrogen for each atom of oxygen (H2O). Deuterium and oxygen can combine in the same ratio (2H2O) to form heavy water.
What was running through those pipes was not deuterium - and a good thing, too, as deuterium is every bit as flammable as its brother hydrogen.
The only thing that the Connie shares in that regard is that it's a several hundred thousand ton brick.
The problem is this: Why is the Kelvin and JJPrise so different from the NX-class starship design? Sure, there are components which remind me vaguely of the NX-class - the metallic look of the Kelvin's bridge, the red phase cannons on the Kelvin, and the weird airlock on the bridge of the JJPrise. But for ships that are direct descendants of the NX-class ship and era, I'm a little confused as to the radical change in starship design.
By all rights, the Kelvin should have had:
The JJPrise should have been a further progression from that:
Those are just my opinions on the ship itself. I found that there seemed to be a huge developmental gap between the NX-class and this ship.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Not everything in RL has a nice tidy evolution to it sometimes there are big leaps that seem ahead of their time. Take aircraft in the 1930's they went from zeppelins to jet planes in less than a decade.
Parallels: my second mission for Fed aligned Romulans.
There was that one moment where I was the only person in a theatre full that guffawed out loud LOL
I thought WoW's forums had angry elitist snobs, but I never could have imagined the level STO forums has.
Matt Jeffries was an aeronautical expert, but I don't think he worked at NASA.
Really, all the Intrepid-class added was the ability to land on a planet and take off again. (The old TOS Technical Manual said that the saucer section of a Constitution-class could land after separation, but would require the assistance of at least two other ships equipped with tractor beams to lift off again.)
Why doesn't the Kelvin look more like an NX-class ship? Well, given the span of time, one might as well ask why a Piper Cub doesn't look more like a Wright Flyer...
:rolleyes: