Comments on: The Following Are STILL Not New Movie Enterprise Images

By: Generation-Joe.com » Star Trek: Style and Engineering:

Generation-Joe.com » Star Trek: Style and Engineering: — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 02:24:52 +0000

[...] The “so close yet so far” feeling comes from the fact that if the secondary hull was extended just a little bit, the visual imbalance would be fixed and so, at a glance, you could guess we were all looking at the same ship here. For example, below is a picture from Spockboy via ScreenRant. Also see some of the work some other fans have done. [...]

By: Star Trek: Style and Engineering « www.generation-joe.com

Star Trek: Style and Engineering « www.generation-joe.com — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:54:15 +0000

By: Joseph

Joseph — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 20:32:12 +0000

I think Dennis Bailey’s design looks the best; even far better than the one JJ Abrams used for is movie. The one in the movie looks weird, and doesn’t look as though it represents the Enterprise.

Dennis Bailey’s design is one that I can look at, and actually call it “Enterprise”.

Great work Dennis. Try talking some sense into JJ Abrams anti-Trek team, and see if you can get to him. Somebody needs to because the man just doesn’t get it.

By: L E Greys

L E Greys — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:37:35 +0000

To add to my earlier comment, I think Dennis Bailey’s design would look quite good in the remastered version of the 60s series that I have heard about. Maybe not as the Enterprise, but I can remember one episode that has four other starships in it. It makes sense that at least one of them would be a halfway house between the telly and film versions of the ship. Perhaps she would be on ’space trials’ or something. After all, the refit did not come out of thin air, and an in-between stage would make sense.

By: L E Greys

L E Greys — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:26:31 +0000

If I think of ‘the Starship Enterprise’, I always see her as the original 1960s TV series ship. That is ‘the Enterprise’ and all the rest are ’some other Enterprise’. The design is simple elegance, there is nothing unnecessary, and her lines are all clean and simple. O.K., if you want a movie featuring that design, yes, show where all the weld joints (or futuristic equivalent) are and so on, and add the odd surface detail, but don’t mess with the lines.

This is all purely aesthetic, and if we ever do get round to building a starship, I very much doubt it will be a flying saucer with engines. Still, the Enterprise isn’t real. The old ship was a 9ft model in Desilu studios. It’s just a question of a design classic that stuck.

Having seen it, I don’t plan to go and see the film. It just looks too different, and it’s offputting. I didn’t much like the last film, Nemesis, either. Star Trek has probably had it’s day, and should go quietly back to spacedock and boldly go on through an eternity of re-runs. It’s a product of the 20th Century, and ought to remain there. The same can be said of many other film franchises, I think it’s about time they killed off James Bond as well, as long as they can make it suitably heroic. There are new stories to tell and new ideas to be explored.

Still, please don’t mess with a classic just for the sake of it. It’s pointless.

By: CJ

CJ — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:08:00 +0000

I must be the only one who thinks that Trek Tech has gone the way of the rainbow smurfs with all the lighting effects and unexplained ‘clear pieces’ as well as the continual copying of the spaced nacelles.

If you want to redo Trek, you should take it as far ahead of where the old one left off as the last of the TV series (what, 2,500?) are from now. You should instate a period of dramatic change as something takes the Federation down without necessarily ‘occupying it as a hostile power’. And then you should reinvision a kind of hybrid (Battletech like) ‘Star League’ vision of humanity coming back from the brink on multiple planets with varying degrees of technology.

At which point, you no longer have to worry about dorky looking ‘two mail tubes, an ice cream scoop and a dinner plate’ design configurations. Nor about the idiocy of having a glowing _solid_ front end to what should be (at best) an invisible force field designed to act like the variable intake on a jet engine in drawing in more natural, interstellar, hydrogen. While glowing hot pink with blue internal strobes.

That obsession with _1960s_ level ‘Bussard Ramjet’ design tech in a semi-realistic universe where ships CANNOT GO FTL so long as they stay in our physics-ruled Mass:Energy quotient space is what is dumb here.

And if you are no longer hoovering up hydrogen because all your power is _internal_ then the nacelles can go. And if the nacelles go, or at least are internalized, with the body of the ship, then the ship itself must dramatically change. As indeed the Kardassian and Bajoran and all the other new-Alien craft seem to get by without that primitive stick and string approach to a very primitive looking, volumetrically inefficient, hullform.

Such is what happens when you get trapped in the past with a reboot of something that was cool for it’s time but is now completely dated. Technically as much as Socially.

Jeep

By: TC

TC — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 04:31:57 +0000

I have to concur, that Jason’s design is the best. He respects canon and does not alter major features of the ship…actually improves and updates them for a more modern bigscreen feel.

I hope J.J. does not disappoint with his rendition…

Hopeful but very nervous.

By: buckky

buckky — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:54:24 +0000

enterprise redesign = bad move
old crew played by new people = bad move

original TOS constitution class on big screen = what I wanted

even if the film is good on its own merit, i cant get past such misjudgement, so i wont even go see it, even though i have been a trekkie all my life. no, BECAUSE i have been.

of all things to mess with. trekkies are the most cannon / continuity sensitive of ALL audiences, dont thiese guys know this?

By: James Random

James Random — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 01:36:29 +0000

ADDENDUM: more likely a cross between the orginal and the enterprise-a

By: James Random

James Random — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 01:34:46 +0000

Well, clearly gabes enterprise will not be the film enterprise, however, looking at the photo from the trailer we can see in the detail of the nacelles that SOME design changes/enhancements have been made…we see sweeping curves a title font for the name that didn’t appear until STIII on the excelsior and we see a sort of sweeping fin at the very tip of the end of each nacelle that blends into the overall design.
I expect we can see a cross between gabes images and the original being the final outcome for the film. Certainly the film is being set up to have a less ‘prissy’ look than previous films (going all battlestar galactica Esque on us).

thats my ten pence.