test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Excelsior class

124»

Comments

  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 57,973 Community Moderator
    You're mistaken. The reason they built the large hull extensions onto the sides of the secondary hull of the Enterprise B model was because the script called for a large gash to be torn open in that location and they didn't want to damage the original model. They added other bits and bobs to complete the image of a refitted, upgraded ship.

    Presumably, the DS9 crew found it easier to repair or replace the damaged hull extension piece than to revert the model to original Excelsior configuration.

    Actually... the glue used to attach the extra bits... damaged the base model. So in their attempt at not damaging the model... they damaged the model.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 57,973 Community Moderator
    You're mistaken. The reason they built the large hull extensions onto the sides of the secondary hull of the Enterprise B model was because the script called for a large gash to be torn open in that location and they didn't want to damage the original model. They added other bits and bobs to complete the image of a refitted, upgraded ship.

    Presumably, the DS9 crew found it easier to repair or replace the damaged hull extension piece than to revert the model to original Excelsior configuration.

    Actually... the glue used to attach the extra bits... damaged the base model. So in their attempt at not damaging the model... they damaged the model.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,659 Arc User
    artan42 wrote: »
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    39634539184_bcbfbe9c8f_o.png

    I think your JJ Enterprise size is very generous.
    ILM made the visual effects and they said on two separate occasions that the Enterprise in the movies is about 720 meters long.
    It is huge in STO as well.

    An a different note: I think the difference in size is considerable. The Discovery dwarfs the Enterprise. It is like saying there is almost no difference between USS Alaska CB-1 (246m) and USS Missouri BB-63 (270m) when in reality the Missouri is almost twice the size of the Alaska… (34k tons vs. 57k tons).

    Like I say, it's the size the model is built to. It's how big it appears every time you can see the windows or exposed interior.

    The shot below is impossible if the ship is Galaxy sized as there would be at least 4 decks, not 2 in the saucer.
    enterprise-exposed-deck.jpg

    Same here. Unless Spock is now this Spock then the ship's main distinguishing feature (the bridge window) wouldn't be visible on a Galaxy sized ship.
    enterprise-bridge-window.jpg

    See also Pike's shuttle leaving the ship, it's the same class of shuttle as earlier in the film, however it's now only just clearing the doors, something that would make the shuttle the size of the Defiant on a Galaxy sized ship.

    Basically, sod the 'official' size, the canon size is clearly different.

    As I said before, the 'official' size of the Prometheus (see here) is smaller than the Nova instead of the size of the Akira (as per the canon). The official size of the BoP is 109ish metres which would render them almost shuttles sized here.

    Basically nobody bends over backward to defend any of the other blatantly incorrect 'official' sized given from sources such as the woefully inaccurate DS9 Technical Manual or Eaglemoss Official Starship Collection yet everybody seems to think the Konni is some sort of special anomaly simply because the visual effects team increased its size for a couple of shots but left it normal sized the rest of the three films it was in.

    I mean the HMS Bounty went from this to this yet nobody bats any eye, but the Konni does it and suddenly it's treated as canon that it's supersized and poor JJ finds himself under more whining fanboi attacks for a artist's dramatic licence.

    ishigami2 wrote: »
    The issue is that J.J. Abrams is a dork. He has no concept of distance, size, time and physics.
    How close is Qo'noS or Vulcan to the earth?

    So business as usual for Star Trek then.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Could you actually watch a black hole consuming a planet from a moon of that planet, a mass big enough to hold an earth like atmosphere and gravity, without being very irreversibly affected by said black hole?

    Could you create a fully functional planet with life from a nebula?
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    How can combat near the moon lead to a fall to earth?

    How can travelling faster than Warp 10 turn you into a newt.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    How can you see a death ray hitting several planets in different star systems from a planet at the other end of the galaxy?

    How close are the planets?
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    J.J. Abrams knows jack **** about this stuff. He only knows what “looks cool”, in the eye of 5 year old.

    So business as usual in the film and television industry.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    He is a fool.

    Let's see your film...
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Oh I agree the ship was initially designed to be about the same size as the original but someone with a small **** complex stepped in and requested an up scale.
    The movies several times clearly demonstrate that this someone got his scale up.

    Clear evidence from the film disproves this. Though you you seem to know a bit about how somebody with a 'small asterix complex' would act...
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Going *lalala* with fingers in your ears isn’t going to reverse that.

    No but watching the film will.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    In STO we have the star destroyer sizes anyway. Vengeance is about twice the length of Discovery ~ 1500 meters.

    STO isn't canon however the Jupiter Class is exactly the length of an Imperial Class Star Destroyer.

    The Dreadnought Class is about 800m in length. It's in the dialogue. Harrison specifically jumps about 40 metres, he jumps from the bridge to the rim of the saucer, you scale that along and you get something in the region of 800m. This fits with Harrison's earlier comments about the ship being twice the size of the Enterprise.​​

    The JJ saucer would need to be like the Constellation one in terms of thickness if it's as big as they say is it.
    I think we can agree JJ and his boys just pulled this out of their behinds, to be 'kewl'.
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,659 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    You're mistaken. The reason they built the large hull extensions onto the sides of the secondary hull of the Enterprise B model was because the script called for a large gash to be torn open in that location and they didn't want to damage the original model. They added other bits and bobs to complete the image of a refitted, upgraded ship.

    Presumably, the DS9 crew found it easier to repair or replace the damaged hull extension piece than to revert the model to original Excelsior configuration.

    Actually... the glue used to attach the extra bits... damaged the base model. So in their attempt at not damaging the model... they damaged the model.

    "It's not broke, let's fix it!" way of thinking.

    They should have just made a new model or something if they were going to smash it up later.
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,659 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    You're mistaken. The reason they built the large hull extensions onto the sides of the secondary hull of the Enterprise B model was because the script called for a large gash to be torn open in that location and they didn't want to damage the original model. They added other bits and bobs to complete the image of a refitted, upgraded ship.

    Presumably, the DS9 crew found it easier to repair or replace the damaged hull extension piece than to revert the model to original Excelsior configuration.

    Actually... the glue used to attach the extra bits... damaged the base model. So in their attempt at not damaging the model... they damaged the model.

    "It's not broke, let's fix it!" way of thinking.

    They should have just made a new model or something if they were going to smash it up later.
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,450 Bug Hunter
    The E*******r is a terrible excuse for a ship. That's on topic right?

    The only good thing that would come out of a remodel would be the parts could be used for the Centaur or to make the far nicer looking Curry and Raging Queen type ships.

    The E*******r shouldn't even be a T6 in the first place.

    @ishigami2
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    So the instances you pick are right and you ignore the ones which contradict you while ignoring what the creators say.
    I got it.

    Umm, no. Not ignoring. Excluding. As those times are outnumbered (you know, as I clearly stated) I excluded them as anomalies.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    You seem to think I’m stranger to this stuff. Like no one but you noticed how the Enterprise A miraculously went from 25 decks to 78+ in Final Frontier or how that Reman was able to fall into a bottomless pit in the Enterprise E despite being in a lower deck on the hull… or how everyone says different amount of decks the ship has.

    And? What's you point here? The model of the Conni doesn't have space for more than 70 ergo it's a simple error. The model of the Konni dosn't have a magic second deck to the shuttlebay or magically shrinking and growing windows ergo it's a simple error.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    The probable reason for the huge BoP is that it is the same model as from TMP area. We know that the Galaxy model got shrunk because it was unhandy to work with it.
    So during filming the BoP would obviously be out of scale compared to the new smaller models. They explained it away with different "types" of BoP. Ranging from small vessel to large cruisers.

    You see, that's why it's different. There is no canonical support for different classes of BoP. That's a fan concept used to ignore the blatantly false 'official' line that the BoP is about 100ish m long.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Scale issues on CGI only should not happen, Kelvin Timeline is CGI only.

    Tell that to the Defiant. Its size changes episode to episode. Even at 170m (the 'official' size) it doesn't have room for a shuttlebay because the model was built to 150ish m.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Everyone I know thinks it was pretty stupid scene and leap in logic.
    The difference is that it is a stupid scene in a great movie while the other is a stupid scene in an average meaningless popcorn-flick.
    One if forgiven, the other one not.

    Incorrect. TWoK was a meaningless diatribe about petty revenge that retconned Khan whereas 09 was a meaningless diatribe about petty revenge that involved a brand new character.

    You do understand what opinion is right?
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    I don’t know. What will happen when you are everywhere at the same time?

    You wouldn't be everywhere at the same time. That concept only appears in Threshold. Everywhere else Warp 10 is simply a speed and can be breached.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    One is a fictional concept the other one actually exists. We know the distance of the moon to the earth and we know the gravimetric pull the earth and moon exerts.
    It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that the scene would not happen. It is called suspense of disbelieve.

    I'm sure you dismiss TOS out of hand then, or VGR. Obviously if one ship can make it back from the edge of the Galaxy in an episode and reach the centre in a single film VGR has no sense of scale getting stuck for 7 years.

    It's like you don't understand how fiction works. Everything is either the speed of plot or exactly one plot away.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Of course you can dig up stupid scenes from several decades of TV shows written and directed by dozens of different people.

    Correct. See how useless it is?
    artan42 wrote: »
    How close are the planets?

    Do you really think that matters on a galactic scale?
    They blow up Coruscant and they watch it from Takonda… http://www.swgalaxymap.com/
    [/quote]

    The did not blow up Coruscant.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Because as we all know everyone who criticizes a film or their creators also has to be a director, producer, screenwriter, actor and special VFX artist.
    That is how the world works.

    And yet you need to be able to have a basic understanding of how a topic works to be able to criticise it.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Clear evidence hu… like humans walking the saucer? Nah lets ignore that… oh a human walking the nacelle! - There evidence!
    Your own website discusses the large Enterprise, it is not just one scene.

    You do know how anomalys work right? I showed you the HMS Bounty. It's like you can't even be bothered reading. I understand scaling changes are made scene by scene for certain reasons.

    It's also not my site, it the site of a whining fanboi stuck in their ridged rose tinted nostalgia of a 'True Trek' that exists only inside the heads of people like that. There's a reason I used the pictures and not just linked the article. It's because I disagree with a lot of it.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    I did and that thing feels so much larger than the original… also because of the interior. That factory scene certainly didn’t help to suggest a hull of only 150 meters or something...

    Like Voyager or the Defiants shuttlebay the Brewery and Laser would not fit inside the Konni at any scale. Both sets are far too wide to fit in even the Galaxy sized Conni. That's a prime example of where I disagree with what you call 'my site'.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Yet the hull alone crashes Alcatraz as a whole which is about 500 meter long…

    You did see my pictures of the Bounty right?
    ​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,450 Bug Hunter
    The JJ saucer would need to be like the Constellation one in terms of thickness if it's as big as they say is it.
    I think we can agree JJ and his boys just pulled this out of their behinds, to be 'kewl'.

    There's probably a few reasons why it was occasionally and inconsistently scaled up. Most of it was dramatic effect I assume. The two decked shuttlebay and huge crashing saucer sold the impact, both metaphorical and physical, of the ship and its role in the film. Probably the same reason they shrunk it against the Mayflower in the Vulcan debris field, to sell the chaos.

    I'm only basing that on the fact that the Bounty was scaled up against the Whaling Ship for a dramatic impact and BoPs were shrunk to near shuttle length a few times in DS9 to look overwhelmed by Dominion ships.

    Another was possibly to attempt a justification for filming in horrendous brewery and laser rooms instead of just spending money on sets like they did with all the other rooms. Though, as I pointed out, the ship would need to be at least a 1000 metres long to fit Turbine Control and the Warp Core room in.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • tyler002tyler002 Member Posts: 1,586 Arc User
    I think there's merit in wondering if the film thought Star Trek had to 'catch up' to other Sci-Fi by making ships stupidly large.

    In the article I linked to on the last page, it mentioned a quote it attributes to ILM Art Director Alex Jaeger:
    The reconfigured ship was a larger vessel than previous manifestations -- approximately 1,200-feet-long compared to the 947-foot ship of the original series. Once we got the ship built and started putting it in environments it felt too small. The shuttle bay gave us a clear relative scale -- shuttles initially appeared much bigger than we had imagined -- so we bumped up the Enterprise scale, which gave her a grander feel and allowed us to include more detail."
    tumblr_p7auh1JPC61qfr6udo4_500.gif
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,659 Arc User
    artan42 wrote: »
    The JJ saucer would need to be like the Constellation one in terms of thickness if it's as big as they say is it.
    I think we can agree JJ and his boys just pulled this out of their behinds, to be 'kewl'.

    There's probably a few reasons why it was occasionally and inconsistently scaled up. Most of it was dramatic effect I assume. The two decked shuttlebay and huge crashing saucer sold the impact, both metaphorical and physical, of the ship and its role in the film. Probably the same reason they shrunk it against the Mayflower in the Vulcan debris field, to sell the chaos.

    I'm only basing that on the fact that the Bounty was scaled up against the Whaling Ship for a dramatic impact and BoPs were shrunk to near shuttle length a few times in DS9 to look overwhelmed by Dominion ships.

    Another was possibly to attempt a justification for filming in horrendous brewery and laser rooms instead of just spending money on sets like they did with all the other rooms. Though, as I pointed out, the ship would need to be at least a 1000 metres long to fit Turbine Control and the Warp Core room in.​​

    JJ should have used the concept art for the engine room, which looked like the TMP one on steroids.
    He wasted resources on his lens flare fetish, it seems.

    Oh, and the Excelsior still ROCKS! ;)
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • ishigami2ishigami2 Member Posts: 138 Arc User
    edited April 2018
    My bad about the Enterprise B. I only remember reading that they modified the Excelsior model and then left it the way it is because they feared to damage it.
    So it was the other way around. Well 50/50 joker and wrong… that’s life.

    I've got nothing more to add. I like Excelsior and the refit.

    @artan42
    artan42 wrote: »
    Umm, no. Not ignoring. Excluding. As those times are outnumbered (you know, as I clearly stated) I excluded them as anomalies.
    An Interview with ILM is an anomaly. Noted.
    artan42 wrote: »
    And? What's you point here?
    That all the mistakes you point out are not ignored or accepted without thought. They are noted, they are mocked. JJ is no special case, he is just the latest and more prominent because of his marketing and reboot direction.
    Yet canon is still up to the creators or license holder...
    Darth Vader did not like sand.
    artan42 wrote: »
    Incorrect. TWoK was a meaningless diatribe about petty revenge that retconned Khan whereas 09 was a meaningless diatribe about petty revenge that involved a brand new character.

    You do understand what opinion is right?
    Yet not every opinion is equal. And don't get all up about it. Mine obviously does not matter to you either...
    artan42 wrote: »
    You wouldn't be everywhere at the same time. That concept only appears in Threshold. Everywhere else Warp 10 is simply a speed and can be breached.

    This is getting off track fast and hard. If your reference is that general you may want to add a point.
    I stand by mine: One is malleable fiction and while the other is fiction as well we have point of reference in reality which can potential break immersion and therefore ruin a scene.
    artan42 wrote: »
    The did not blow up Coruscant.
    My bad. Due to the amazing story telling of this master piece I was under the false impression established places still matter. It was Hosina prime. Still a core world, still thousand of LY away. Makes no difference to the argument.

    "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
    artan42 wrote: »
    I'm sure you dismiss TOS out of hand then, or VGR. Obviously if one ship can make it back from the edge of the Galaxy in an episode and reach the centre in a single film VGR has no sense of scale getting stuck for 7 years.

    It's like you don't understand how fiction works. Everything is either the speed of plot or exactly one plot away.

    Movies are contemporary, as any media. If I would measure TOS by todays standards it would not hold up all that well. But TOS was made in 60ies.
    I did not watch Voyager to the end. Afaik it is accepted by most that Voyagers course home was stupid.

    Yes all is fiction. But some things make a story and some things break a story.
    You can make up all the stuff in the world, doesn't mean it will make a good story.
    artan42 wrote: »
    And yet you need to be able to have a basic understanding of how a topic works to be able to criticise it.
    Because you know what I know...
    artan42 wrote: »
    You do know how anomalys work right? I showed you the HMS Bounty. It's like you can't even be bothered reading. I understand scaling changes are made scene by scene for certain reasons.
    Yea I saw it. Like dozens others you and so many other people pointed out elsewhere.
    What do you want me to say? “That looked odd”? - That looked odd.
    And you be surprised I get it too. There are budget and technology constraints and your dramatic impact and whatnot how many other. When it takes you out of the movie it becomes an issue.
    The Death Star is rather small we should see a pronounced curvature in the dog fights over it yet it appears flat giving the impression the death star is planet size.
    Technology: A model with the exact curvature was to complex to build.
    Budget: You need more time to build a complex model and time is money. Lucas had sever budget constraints.
    Dramatic impact: The death star seen from the fighters above it looks way bigger therefore it poses visually more of a threat. Visual representation of the vast power of the empire vs. the small irrelevant Rebel Alliance represented by 20meter something fighters.
    But the main thing is when watching the movie, maybe only for the first time, you focus on the struggle of the rebels. On the tension of looming demise. The growth of characters: Of Luke embracing the teachings and growing stronger and Han returning proving he is good guy. Most people when watching those scene for the first time did not immediately think about the size of the Death Star at the time. Good movie.

    When I watched JJ Star Trek I was constantly thinking about stuff that shouldn’t matter like what is that set Uhura works in? How big is that Enterprise?
    That is not to say I didn’t enjoy some of it. The joke with the vaccine going wrong was actually funny.
    artan42 wrote: »
    Correct. See how useless it is?

    How useless what is?
    Reminding you and the readers that your chart is not canon?
    The existence of canon in general?
    Or pointing out JJ deliberate misrepresentations of similar issues in 3 consecutive movies to make a point about him only caring about visual spectacle catering to an audience of low attention span?
    artan42 wrote: »
    Like Voyager or the Defiants shuttlebay the Brewery and Laser would not fit inside the Konni at any scale. Both sets are far too wide to fit in even the Galaxy sized Conni. That's a prime example of where I disagree with what you call 'my site'.

    I called it your site because you linked it. I did not assume you be the author.
    Look I get it: The visual cues you get tells you the Enterprise is only 360 meters. Okay.
    I only pointed out ILM said otherwise and the cues I get tell me it is huge. The only thing consistent here is that it is inconsistent. And as far as I can tell that is one point we share.
    My remark about the history was meant to illustrate that over time yes many cooks will spoil the broth and I do not necessarily expect the same continuity in a TV show lasting several seasons and a rather short lived movie series. However it was one of my points as well that in case of Kelvin it weren’t that many cooks yet and it already is a mess. If it wasn’t we wouldn’t have this discussion right now.

    Btw. if this shows up twice it is because I'm, too stupid for this BB.
    Post edited by ishigami2 on
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,450 Bug Hunter
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    An Interview with ILM is an anomaly. Noted.

    No an interview with ILM is not canon and can be dismissed without a second's thought. The discussion is about how the ship appears onscreen thous only canon argument on either side are applicable.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    That all the mistakes you point out are not ignored or accepted without thought. They are noted, they are mocked. JJ is no special case, he is just the latest and more prominent because of his marketing and reboot direction.
    Yet canon is still up to the creators or license holder...
    Darth Vader did not like sand.

    Well firstly JJ has not rebooted Star Trek, he wasn't allowed to. The KT films exist in the same continuity as the rest of the franchise, simply being set in a different reality within it. Secondly, I don't know how much time you've spent on Star Trek fan sites but as soon as the new thing comes out the previous stuff is not untouchable pureness. TNG was hated by fanbois and is not the holy cornerstone of the Franchise. ENT stopped them whining about VGR, TKT about ENT, and now DSC about TKT.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Yet not every opinion is equal. And don't get all up about it. Mine obviously does not matter to you either...

    Unless the opinion contradicts reality (an opinion on an objective manner) then no, they are exactly equal.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    This is getting off track fast and hard. If your reference is that general you may want to add a point.
    I stand by mine: One is malleable fiction and while the other is fiction as well we have point of reference in reality which can potential break immersion and therefore ruin a scene.

    Or, more coherently, it's a dismissal of sci-fi tropes you don't like and an allowance of ones you do. Unless you believe time travel, warp drive, deflector shields and the rest are compatible with physics.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    The did not blow up Coruscant.
    My bad. Due to the amazing story telling of this master piece I was under the false impression established places still matter. It was Hosina prime. Still a core world, still thousand of LY away. Makes no difference to the argument.
    "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."

    So films should only use locations previous entries used? Gee, I wonder it that could lead to any criticism...
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Movies are contemporary, as any media. If I would measure TOS by todays standards it would not hold up all that well. But TOS was made in 60ies.
    I did not watch Voyager to the end. Afaik it is accepted by most that Voyagers course home was stupid.

    VGR made sense, as you so helpfully put it...
    'Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.' However the issue is still selection based on your preconceived conclusion.
    It's not like it was impossible to make different standards of television in the 60s. The reason was that the science fiction elements were to drive the plot forewords, not to stand alone. Same with the KT films.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Yes all is fiction. But some things make a story and some things break a story.
    You can make up all the stuff in the world, doesn't mean it will make a good story.

    Oh no you're right. 09 stands as a good story independent of fictional rules.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Because you know what I know...

    Well I see what you write.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    When I watched JJ Star Trek I was constantly thinking about stuff that shouldn’t matter like what is that set Uhura works in? How big is that Enterprise?
    That is not to say I didn’t enjoy some of it. The joke with the vaccine going wrong was actually funny.

    Yes, that's why they're anomalies. Like I say, those sets wouldn't fit in the larger Konni either.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    How useless what is?
    Reminding you and the readers that your chart is not canon?
    The existence of canon in general?
    Or pointing out JJ deliberate misrepresentations of similar issues in 3 consecutive movies to make a point about him only caring about visual spectacle catering to an audience of low attention span?

    Well none of those three things relate to my point at all, but for the sake of continuing until the bitter end...

    I know they're not canon, reason being is that I made them. As far as I know they don't appear on-screen in and Star Trek production. They are however representation of the 'official' sizes of Starfleet ships based on the latest official figures from the Official Starship Collection with anomalous ships listed at both their 'official' and modal canon sizes.

    You're clearly talking to the wrong person if you think I mean canon doesn't matter or 'exist'.

    The third one is close but still wrong.
    artan42 wrote: »
    Like Voyager or the Defiants shuttlebay the Brewery and Laser would not fit inside the Konni at any scale. Both sets are far too wide to fit in even the Galaxy sized Conni. That's a prime example of where I disagree with what you call 'my site'.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Look I get it: The visual cues you get tells you the Enterprise is only 360 meters. Okay.
    I only pointed out ILM said otherwise and the cues I get tell me it is huge. The only thing consistent here is that it is inconsistent. And as far as I can tell that is one point we share.

    Well yes, but my point is that 'official' sizes are ignored for other ships with clearly different scales as they more often appear at completely different scales to the ones 'officially' picked and that it's hypocritical to single out the Konni from ships like the Defiant that changes episode to episode.
    ishigami2 wrote: »
    Btw. if this shows up twice it is because I'm, too stupid for this BB.

    I was notified twice but it's only posted once.[/spoiler]​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Sign In or Register to comment.