It would take years and a whole team of designers to really do it justice. Every little thing deserves attention. Both the interiors and exteriors need to make sense, be aestetically pleasing, and stay true to basic Star Trek traditions. This is no small task.
Hopefully its not going to look like Archer's ship. That was a rather boring design, all the way around.
Yes, he's one man with an opinion, but his last episode of New Voyages was also (in another man's opinion) one of the best episodes ever made. Not ever made in fandom; ever made in Trekdom.
He's not a geek who lives in a basement, not a hypocrite, and not a loser who's only job is playing Star Trek.
You need to get more informed about people before you try to slander and insult them. Cawley's put a lot of personal money and time to try and keep Star Trek alive, and I think he deserves a lot more credit and respect than he's getting here.
--------
"Outer Space: The Last Frontier.
These are the trips of the Star Trek Enterprise. Its five year plan calls for us to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly fly where no man has gone in space. Live long, and be happy."
Patrick Stewart--SNL, Stardate 9402.05
I don't know much about this guy or much about the "New Voyages" project, but for an actor who is actively "re-imaging" classic Trek himself to criticize another "re-imaging" is pretty damn hypocritical. It's also illogical for him to accept himself as a successor to Shatner without entertaining the notion of updating the original Enterprise for similar reasons. It's pretty clear he doesn't object to the design for design's sake. He objects to it because it's not the exact same as the original.
-
Well said.
As to Cawley and the bridge design, that's my sense as well. His problem is that it's not a perfect recreation of TOS.
--------
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.
"If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry
If the altered timeline plot of the film is fact, it may be that what James saw was an Enterprise, and not necessarily the Enterprise (the one that we and Nimoy's Spock would know).
If the timeline is successfully fixed, we may see the classic ship once more at the end.
If not, then there's a new future for Kirk and his crew.
Either way, it'll be an interesting voyage.
-
Quote:
If the altered timeline plot of the film is fact, it may be that what James saw was an Enterprise, and not necessarily the Enterprise (the one that we and Nimoy's Spock would know).
If the timeline is successfully fixed, we may see the classic ship once more at the end.
If not, then there's a new future for Kirk and his crew.
Either way, it'll be an interesting voyage.
You make a good point. I think it all boils down to whether this is supposed to be a reimagining or something that fits within the canon. According to Abrams it's supposed to fit within the canon. So for that reason, they can't change one rivet of the 1701 and expect fans to accept that. The only way for it to work is either for Abrams to out and say this is a new, reimagined Star Trek, which will upset people like James but, in my view, ultimately be accepted by a wider swath of Trek fandom than trying to make us accept a redesign just for the sake of updating -- or, as suggested above, make this only a temporary redesign caused by a timeline change. Didn't something similar occur in Yesteryear?
Worst case scenario would be for the timeline to change and the new Enterprise be permanently "updated". That would instantlly alienate TNG, DS9 and VOY fans.
Al
Back in 1976 Paramount was developing a film called Star Trek: Planet of the Titans. They hired Ralph McQuarrie (the guy who designed much of the look of Star Wars) to re-imagine the Enterprise.
His designs were radically different than TOS's 1701. I doubt that the ship in the new film could be less like the Enterprise than the ones he designed.
Here is a link to one model, reused in TNG (oddly, in Unification, the last appearance of Spock until this new film):
McQuarrie Design 1
Another Enterprise concept (can you say Star Destroyer?).
Star Wars like Enterprise
-
PLANET OF TITANS and THE GOD THING would be fantastic movies. THE GOD THING may be the best thing Gene Roddenberry ever wrote. Too bad Paramount cancelled the two projects because of the Phase II TV Series (which was of course, also cancelled and its pilot adapted into STAR TREK THE MOTION PICTURE).
Gustavo
PS - The Ralph McQuarrie Enterprise is actually an interesting design. I would love to see her as the Enterprise-F or G, in a possible future Star Trek production (yes, I know, thats not gonna happen).
--------
TrekWeb.com Supervising Editor
gl2000@uol.com.br
-
Quote:
PS - The Ralph McQuarrie Enterprise is actually an interesting design. I would love to see her as the Enterprise-F or G, in a possible future Star Trek production (yes, I know, thats not gonna happen).
You know, lose the grossly undersized saucer section off that design, and you've got a pretty spiffy late 21st/early 22cd century spacecraft on your hands.
--------
Not the I even necessarily disagree, but I find it an interesting editorial choice to headline what essentially amounts to a single fan's opinion as if, because he has smacked out some nice fan films, he is somehow more authoritative than anyone else.
The fact remains, we haven't been living with "Gene's Trek" since TNG's episode "Disaster." Trek grows beyond its creator.
And now apparently also beyond its "fans."
--------
"Aha! Advancing on me only brings you closer to the cold wrath that is my spork!" - Bucky the Katt
-
Quote:
...I find it an interesting editorial choice to headline what essentially amounts to a single fan's opinion as if, because he has smacked out some nice fan films, he is somehow more authoritative than anyone else.
He is more authoritative, HE HAS SEEN THE DESIGN!
Since he has and we all have not, its fair to report his opinion of it.
-
How do we know with any certainty what he saw was the final design? Or even one actually from the production, for that matter. Because he claims to know people in the right places?
Sorry, I'm not inclined to trust the word of a fanfilm "actor" who's not involved in the production until I've actually seen a legitimately released photo of the ship's design from those involved with the production. Until then, we're still dealing in rumor and speculation, as far as I'm concerned.
--------
"Oh relax, Cupcake. It was a joke."- James T. Kirk
-
I would believe him. They did loan part of their set to Paramount for the ENT mirror episode. Paramount has no problem featuring them on StarTrek.com and their magazine. Shows some respect and a relationship between Cawley and Paramount.
Plus, I don't think Cawley would lie and risk his fan base for NV.
Also, I think Paramount knows NV is keeping the show alive for fans who want something new. The acting is improving, the scripts are very good (DC Fontana? David Gerrold?). IMHO, its more fun to watch than VOYAGER or ENTERPRISE (except season 4).
You sound like a NV hater.
Wow for a guy who is a obviously a die hard to go on record with this is pretty balls-eeeeee!
Quote:”"I have seen the New REBOOTED Enterprise, I have Friends in the right places! At any rate, I don't like it. It is supposed to be NCC-1701, no bloody A,B,C,D or E! and it sure does not look like the 1701 I grew up with!" he said
For a die hard like this to make such a statement it makes you wonder! (Can everyone say “Abrams Superman will now start to show its ugly head...haha) It is so sad that the people doing this movie are not fans of Trek. How do you honestly do a prequel to TOS and not use the same design. It is ridiculous!! But I am sure the “lets wait and see” people will have some incredible insight on this.
Quote:”I just don't agree with changing such iconic designs that are so ingrained in pop culture, it is really needless."
Agreed. It is like making the “Death Star” a triangle.
Quote:”I just don't want the production design radically changed. I see Matt Jefferies designs as "TIMELESS", and as "Pure Science Fiction", I feel the Big E as designed by Matt deserves it's day on the big screen.
Oh come on now. The Transformer boys and JJ Berman KNOW what they are doing! They are such big fans of Trek! How could the creator of Felicity let us all down! Hahaha This is another nail in the coffin for Trek.
Quote:” I have seen what was purported to be the final design of the New Enterprise, and I don't like the changes."
The funny thing is you will get some people cough, baaaa, cough saying how great it is going to be.
Quote:”Re-imagining or rebooting IS changing what Star Trek is." he said "I am not against the recasting at all. But Star Trek is NOT broken, it does Not need to be fixed or REIMAGINED or anthing of the sort. It needs a great story with a Heart in the familar trappings of it's universe.
And THAT is the reason why the last 2 movies sucked ass. The stories were crap. Doing Tiny Toon TOS is just silly. A new series was the way to go not going backwards. I can't wait to this project fails.
Quote:"What we are going to get is J.J. Abrams take on Trek, NOT Gene's Trek, not the one we have all been enjoying for all these years,
Wow Abrams “Superman” is coming to fruition after all these years!
-
Hmm...somehow I knew you'd love this post. Anything that you can latch onto to in order to continue beating that horse of yours which has been dead for ages now, huh?
Nevermind that we as of yet have not actually seen what the Enterprise looks like for this movie. It is merely the word of a fanboy who supposedly saw an image of it (how do we know it's even the final design which he saw? Or that it is even a genuine image from the production?).
But yeah, just keep right on jabbering away even though we're still dealing solely in rumor and speculation.
*waits for the "nuh-uh" reply to come*
--------
"Oh relax, Cupcake. It was a joke."- James T. Kirk
-
For a very big fan like James Cawley who has been doing his fanboy stuff out of his own pocket for some time. Been able to actually work with some Trek stars and do this because he loves it says a lot. His opinion to me holds more weight any day compared to yours, or should I say lack of one.
You can sit back with your weak "speculation" comments all you want hoping that it means anything. But what are you going to say when the design comes out and it doesn't even match the ENT despite the fact it is suppose to be a prequel? Then what are you going to say when the plot comes out that it is nothing more than a First Contact rip off (Romulans instead of Borg)? I will expect the response will be the caliber of "d'uhhh".
-
Well...we'll see what there is to say when we actually have something concrete for me to comment on.
As for my response being something along the lines of "d'uhhh", I wouldn't even try to copy your posting style (may not be my most highbrow response, but I'm sticking with it).
--------
"Oh relax, Cupcake. It was a joke."- James T. Kirk
-
Quote:"Well...we'll see what there is to say when we actually have something concrete for me to comment on. "
I am going to hold you to that!
For the record I am going to assume that you would agree that a prequel to TOS should have the Enterprise that looks like the one in the show and not something completely different. I am also going to assume that you have seen First Contact and will easily see the comparisons of "Romulans vs Borg", "Federation vs Kirk" etc. So again I am going to ask the big questions once you get the "trailer or personal photos from Abrams".
This is going to be interesting!
Perhaps they will do another special edition of TOS-remastered by using the new movie-design for our favourite ship.
--------
living in darkness / sleeping in light
Maybe I'm a little too progressive, but I think the entire look of the TREK universe needs to change, especially the outside look of the Enterprise. No problem with a slight "nod" to what has gone before, but it all needs to look vastly different and contemporary.
To be honest, I was a little disappointed with the first photos revealed of Quinto as Spock. I expected the pointed ears, that's obvious, but I had hoped the makers to create, at the very least, a new and different hairstyle and look to the Spock character.
-
Spock's look is not really the problem. As an alien he shouldn't reall have a hip look to him. He should stand out a bit with his geeky hairstyle.
--------
"Oh, I'll wake up
To any sound of engines,
Ev'ry gull a seeking craft..."
Kate Bush, And Dream of Sheep
-
Plus, this is Star Trek. If they are going to work in that universe, then they need to work with what they are given. Some things have nothing wrong with them. The look of the Enterprise is one of them.
Star Trek is not now...nor has it ever really been about the STUFF. Someone putting THAT much stock in the uniforms and the bridge layout is really missing the point.
Something that syrprises me coming from a guy like this. I thought he'd know better.
--------
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.
"If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry
-
It depends on your viewpoint. Personally, I'd like to see the bridge just as it was, but with better detail, etched lines on the wall panels, textures here and there, real video screens up on the top, etc. But what if they redesigned it entirely...Spock now has a chair beside the Captain and those command chairs are sunk into the floor...the main shape of the bridge is a v-shap outward from a central turbolift in the back...etc. Is that necessary? What if you as a fan consider the set (ship) to be just as much a character as anyone else? I don't want the bridge drastically altered. Everyone's stations should be where they were and vaguelly like the original pilot at least...
Knight Rider was a black sports car, not a white minivan. The A-team drove a black van with a Red swoosh...the General Lee is orange . . . etc. Something things, while you may certainly update them...need to be UPDATED, not revamped.
-
Quote:
Something things, while you may certainly update them...need to be UPDATED, not revamped.
This guy certainly sounds, to me anyway, like a devout purist. Am I the only one that gets the sense that this guy would be upset to have Spock's station on the left instead of the right....or that those lil silver viewers aren't there as in the pilot episodes?
Fact is, we have no idea what it looks like. We don't know that it ISN'T just updated.
--------
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.
"If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry
-
All of you trashing Cawley just for stating his opinion only make yourselves look bad, not him. He's got a right to an opinion, and just because some of you don't agree with it (which makes no sense anyway, since none of us have yet seen it to have an opinion) is no reason to go out of your way to insult him. How childish and rude. It's no wonder so many people see the sci-fi crowd as anally compulsive weirdos that take their hobbies too seriously.
Now, I do agree that while Cawley's series has the right look, it's not very well-acted or well-written--but that shouldn't even enter into this discussion. He apparently saw what the ship looks like and posted his opinion about it. I, for one, found it interesting to see an early reaction to the ship design, especially coming from someone who's so obviously an avid fan.
Someone called him "unimpeachable," which I think is overstating the case a bit since Cawley is just a fan, like the rest of us, and his opinion holds no more merit than anyone else's. But I am still glad to hear what that opinion is. To those of you who don't want to hear his opinion, let me ask you this: Why are you even here? The whole point of this forum is to hear what others have to say.
Honestly, I think some of you guys just enjoy being jerks so you can feel self-important. If he'd said, "The ship looks great--I can't wait to see this movie!" then some of you would probably have trashed him for being a mouthpiece. I don't know what has happened to fandom over the last decade, but it's become incredibly negative.
--------
Rich Handley
Author, Timeline of the Planet of the Apes: The Definitive Chronology
Available now from Hasslein Books
www.hassleinbooks.com
-
so can I. Don't like the way I do it, no one is asking you to read it.
And, quite frankly, he has it coming because I'm quite sick of some people (Cawley included, it seems) that places an insane emphasis of the instrumentation of it all. It's not Trek if Conn isn't in the same spot. Not Trek 'cause it's not a replica of 1966.
Never mind that your ENTIRE post is doing what you accuse others of in the first place.
--------
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.
"If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry
Cawley is as close to an unimpeachable source as they come. Some people just desparately want to believe that the producers of this movie can do no wrong. Disagree and you get flamed. It's about $. I respect the ability of the artists involved, but it's being made for money. Everybody says their a fan, just like with Nemesis.
-
If James Cawley says it sucks then I tend to believe him on this matter, the Man has pumped hundereds of thousands of dollars of his own money into producing a quality product - New Voyages -. I find it to be a bad omen, that someone as passionet as Mr. Cawley is about star trek is saying this. JJ perhaps a
re-think on your re-boot re-design of a ship we all love dear.
-
I'm confused. How are you you NOT drinking Cawley's kool-aid as opposed to Abrams? "unimpeachable source"? Seriously.
How about this. Let's all use our OWN brains and make our own judgments when the final product hits the theatres.
Good or bad...it will be MY judgment when the movie comes out. If JJ makes a bad movie, I will make that judgment...not Cawley or JJ or whoever.
For a guy's whose sole claim to fame is a poor imitation of Shatner's worst acting, he should tread more lightly. The look of the show is great, but the writing and acting is really bad.
I will say that the new actress in the Sulu episode was good They should keep her.
It's pretty much a given that the Enterprise will be redesigned somewhat for the movie. While I'm sure the basic shape will remain the same, there is bound to be more detail and maybe even some tweaking of certain sections like the bridge or nativagional deflector. Sounds to me like Cawley wanted a model 100% faithful to the old show and that's just not a realistic expectation for a multimillion dollar film. Same goes for the bridge and other interior sets as well. As long as the elements are recognizable I don't mind the filmmakers taking some artistic license.
It's time to let got of the past. Those episodes and movies will always be with us; there's nothing wrong changing the look of certain things and giving it all a fresh coat of paint. Just as long as the story is good.
-
please...if the movie is to have any updated look, redesigning the bridge controls is essential. People today are computer-savvy. The bridge needs to be at LEAST as advanced as an iPod touch. I don't have any problem with a bridge interior redesign. Not one bit. TOS did the best it could...and I do like the color, etc. But that kind of loud hey-we-have-color-tv-now aesthetic won't fly in 2008. I hope they retain the basic semi-circle, captain's chair, viewscreen elements, but as for the readouts and panels----that stuff needs to be made modern. It doesn't discard anything essential to Trek. Trek is what Cawleys says it's about---the stories. So who needs to keep the knobs and readouts they used in 1968?? Redesign without reimagining.
--------
Click here to check out my band, ego tree , and the Ego Tree site at myspace. Listen to/buy the CD for $9.99! ALSO AVAILABLE ON iTUNES!!
Cawley is doing a terrific job keeping TOS alive with Star Trek New Voyages. The last episode, starring George Takei, was really fantastic.
If he has problems with the redesigned Enterprise, it is not a good thing. I will trust his word on this matter.
Gustavo
--------
TrekWeb.com Supervising Editor
gl2000@uol.com.br
-
uhh...how is he keeping TOS alive when nothing he is doing is canon? I'm confused as to what you mean by this. Whether you think his stories are good or "trek-like" or not is irrelevent. You can appreciate the stories, but they will NEVER be canon...so they are not TOS in any way that I'm aware of. If I'm wrong, I'm open to correction.
-
Hmmm... Lets see... James has TOS WRITERS writing the episodes, ORIGINAL TOS actors guest starring in them, the support of Rod and Majel Barrett Roddenberry.
Paramount may get to decide what is canon and what is not... but which one sounds more like canon to you? And which one feels more like canon to you? And which one looks more like canon?
If you haven't answered "New Voyages" then you havent seen it.
-
All irrelevent. Too many of TOS writers wrote horrbile eps. Design and big buttons? Who cares...it was never about the sets or the ship's design. Props either accentuate a story or distract. The old sets simply distract at this stage of history.
Former actors? When Shatner and Nimoy sign on as guests, I might take notice of the New Voyages masterpiece. Until then, I don't want to watch the live version of boys playing out scenarios with their action figures.
Come on people...is it ideology or the forms? Which is more important? Way too much is being made of FORM.
-
Quote:
All irrelevent. Too many of TOS writers wrote horrbile eps.
True enough, but that also points out your total lack of knowledge of New Voyages... it's not just ANY writers, it is the best of the bunch, like Howard Weinstein, DC Fontana, George Clayton Johnson. So your point is irrelevant, and your knowledge of NV is severely lacking.
Quote:
Design and big buttons? Who cares...it was never about the sets or the ship's design. Props either accentuate a story or distract. The old sets simply distract at this stage of history.
Well, (1) we are talking about re-designing the EXTERNALS of the ship. James did not mention the consoles or interior until his later followup post (but even in that, #2 below applies). Matt Jeffries design, besides being iconic, still have a futuristic appeal to them. On this point, again it seems you arent even reading the post you are responding to before replying with irrelevant comments (his followup post came AFTER your initial post on this subject).
(2) a good story (for instance a play) should be able to stand on it's own merits based off the story and the acting... you dont seem to subscribe to that notion, and plays and musicals you probably also think a waste of time as well.
(3) In addition to that, Paramount has shown an increasing tendency towards thinking that special effects and fancy computer consoles make up for poor stories... I dont believe that. They may believe that, but their (lack of) success with later Trek series proves THEM wrong and ME correct - regardless of your beliefs on that matter.
Quote:
Former actors? When Shatner and Nimoy sign on as guests, I might take notice of the New Voyages masterpiece. Until then, I don't want to watch the live version of boys playing out scenarios with their action figures.
No action figures involved, once again, it seems like with no knowledge of NV, you spout off whatever nonsense you want. By your reasoning, it's not Star Trek without Nimoy and Shatner, and the rest of the crew doesnt matter.
Also by your determined lack of response to the other points like Rod and Majel Barret Roddenberry's involvement, it seems you are discounting them as well...
The only other thing I could possibly glean, is that you dont want good Star Trek, but instead want flashy cgi and something entirely different but named the same.
Quote:
Come on people...is it ideology or the forms? Which is more important? Way too much is being made of FORM.
The FORM (in the stories) worked for TOS for over 40 YEARS... that should say something... you are defining FORM as special effects... not story. Or so it seems... and basing it on a TOTAL lack of knowledge of New Voyages.
Just as an FYI, WEaT and TSAMD have had more viewers than EVERY episode of Enterprise combined... believe what you will, but I'd say that those figures mean enough fans tend to agree with me.
-
Wow...struck a nerve. I could care less about CGI. I actually believe it often distracts just as bad as the 60's looking sets would. If I cared about sets, I'd nit-pick about the many incarnations of the movie enterprise bridges. I simply don't care about such things.
I care about good stories and good acting/execution...ironically, two things that your fellow NV fans have repeatedly admitted lacks with your precious TOS spin-off. Not my words, BTW...go read some of the other responses.
I didn't respond to some of your comments because I don't feel compelled to respond to everything. I respond to what interests me. Deal with it.
Majel...Ron...Cawley. Who cares? Meh...
-
uhh...how is he keeping TOS alive when nothing he is doing is canon? I'm confused as to what you mean by this. Whether you think his stories are good or "trek-like" or not is irrelevent. You can appreciate the stories, but they will NEVER be canon...so they are not TOS in any way that I'm aware of. If I'm wrong, I'm open to correction.
-
You are mistaken, I am not saying his web episodes are canon. But just like Pocket Books Trek novels and IDW Trek comics, his New Voyages episodes are great to watch and done with care and professionalism, in a time that Paramount is not producing new Star Trek. Star Trek New Voyages, like the novels and the comics, are fun. Canon or not.
Gustavo
--------
TrekWeb.com Supervising Editor
gl2000@uol.com.br
-
I think the production value of Cawleys sets and effects have been great, but I think all the acting and scripts have been embarrasingly bad, though they get a little better each time. The Kirk (Cawley), Scotty, and Bones actors are the worst----they seem like they're trying to be funny/bad (like a Saturday Night Live parody of nerdy fans). I respect the production ability, but the professionalism is NOWHERE near the Pocket Books, etc, which I enjoy.
--------
Click here to check out my band, ego tree , and the Ego Tree site at myspace. Listen to/buy the CD for $9.99! ALSO AVAILABLE ON iTUNES!!
-
Yeah, I agree, the acting is sub-par, but they are improving, the Takei episode was very professional from acting to direction. Sure, the Pocket Books novels are more entertaining than New Voyages. Peter David's latest TNG novel, Before Dishonor, was awesome.
Gustavo
--------
TrekWeb.com Supervising Editor
gl2000@uol.com.br
-
I didn't read "Before Dishonor" yet. I was sick this week, though, and read Death in Winter, Resistance (the TNG relaunches) and Captain's Glory (the Shatnerverse/Totality book).
The Shatner book was a little weak, I thought. A big build up that went nowhere fast. The TNG relaunch, though, was really well-done. It felt like TNG to me.
By the way, I didn't see the Takei New Voyage yet. I saw the preview but didn't see that it was finished. I'll check it out.
--------
Click here to check out my band, ego tree , and the Ego Tree site at myspace. Listen to/buy the CD for $9.99! ALSO AVAILABLE ON iTUNES!!
-
Cawley has a lot of credibility with me. He's one of us. He just happens to have some cash to make these amazing stories. I don't agree 100 percent with him, but I know that he is a guy who just gets it. If he doesn't like the new Enterprise, then that's a MAJOR red flag. Not surprised though, given how they botched the Shatner thing.
-
Quote:
If he has problems with the redesigned Enterprise, it is not a good thing. I will trust his word on this matter.
Yeah, I'm not keen on completely redesigning the Enterprise. I'm totally behind this movie and really looking forward to it. I just don't know why they felt they had to completely change the Enterprise...if that is what they have done. Until there are images of the Enterprise then all this is hearsay. Also, is Cawley talking about the interior, the exterior, or both? I would of course expect the interior to be quite different.
...actually, the redesign might end up being quite good. They redesigned her for TMP and that was quite an overhaul. The only aspect of the Enterprise I want kept is the basic design: two nacelles, an engineering section, and a saucer. Aside from that I'm all for some redesigning. I don't know, but I really have a hard time believing that they would turn the Enterprise into a Star Destroyer.
--------
There once was a man named Scorned,
whose posts were more offensive than porn.
He posted one too many,
got kicked out on his fanny,
and all the while he had been warned.
Wish i could see the whole article, but my address ends in *.info. It tells me i am locked out because "most .info's are spammers." Not that I cared, but I couldn't even back up to put in another email because that was locked out.
Screw clearing my cookies and whatever other hoops I have to do to use another address.
Cawley, if you read this, got to http://ericphillips.info and see I am not a spammer.
Jeez
Is this what it came to when a hack doing a very bad job of acting like William Shartner commenting on the real Star Trek materials? Go back to your parent's basement you fucking loser.
-
He's also produced better Star Trek that has more heart than anything Trek related since GR died. Yeah, the acting leaves a lot to be desired, though getting real actors and writers certainly cured that. One thing that production never lacked was heart and an understanding of Star Trek, even when I didn't agree with some of the moves they made.
He's a nobody. He's a 1960's throw-back, Capt. Kirk wannabe. He's a bad actor who can't get a real job, so he created his own.
I will reserve my judgement until I see the new design for myself.
--------
"It's not who I am inside, but what I do that defines me." -Batman
www.gracelockport.com
-
Agreed. While some of the fan-boys seem to think this guy is "somebody', I've never heard of him and don't care to "educate myself" on his silly little action-figure scenarios...err...episodes. Go back to playing with your Star Trek figures, dude. Can't take this seriously.
Frankly, for people who seem so interested in staying true to original Trek Canon, I'm amazed that there are those that look past the fact that this guy's stories are NON-CANON. He gets a pass because he uses hippie-designs and big buttons? Go ahead and keep telling yourselves that keeping the iconic designs validates his non-canon drivel while JJ shoots his canononical movie. Hypocrisy!
We all have our own brains...so let's all make our own judgments based on the finished product. What this guy thinks should be completely irrelevant to your views. Ask youself a question. Does this guy seriously control your personal views to the point where you're down on something you haven't even seen?
...on a big budget film. Trek, in part, has been about inspiring technologists. We're past that hippie colored, huge-buttoned, flashing readouts that say nothing style. Audiences would snicker at the repainted dining room chairs.
This is the age of ergonomics, ease of use, smooth and streamlined readouts. Let the redesign inspire as the previous one did. I, for one, am looking forward to seeing it.
Sorry, James. your whining doesn't interest me.
--------
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.
"If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry
-
I sort of agree. The costumes and panels should be updated, but the exterior is fine. It is the ship that inspired all othr Federation ship designs in the history of the show. Maybe it could have some detail added to give the eye something to really see on a big screen, and for shadows to grab, but the design is wonderful.
Actually, when I watched ENT's "Though a Mirror, Darkly" was surprised at how good the sets and the ship looked when well lit (many of the old episodes have poor lighting).
If I were to redesign the bridge I would have the stations outside the middle along the rail facing inward, a little like the ENT bridge did, because I think the bridge crew could benefit from line of sight with each other and the viewscreen. The CONN could stay as is. Between the Captain's chair and the helm I would design a tactical table, much like on a sub, where Kirk could stand more and bark orders. It would look good.
I'd also mess with the jobs a little. Uhura should be more than communications. She should be a sensor person, dealing with communication, detection of ships, electonic warfare. And the helm should combine helm and navigation from the old show, with the nav position becoming more a tactical station. This would better deine their roles and give Uhura a lot more to do!
-
Honestly, I don't have a problem with any of your suggestions. In fact, things like "line of sight" layout are moden and relevant. They should look to the modern navy as a base and build from that.
And, yes, the "hailing frequencies open" girl needs a little more depth. :)
--------
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.
"If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry
I am not one to censor people, but I think that James Cawley should have been quiet on this. He enjoys a following (I don't know how large) and making this statement now only stirs up trouble.
Further, Paramount has been fairly kind to him, it doesn't appear that they are vigorously going after the fan films like they could. He gets promotion on startrek.com, and also in the Star Trek magazine, both of which are controlled by the studio.
I don't begrudge him his "access", but I think it is unprofessional of him to spill a tidbit like this.
That being said, as long as it is out there-- this begs the question- just how different? I don't expect the ship to look like the TOS series ship, as least as far as surface, and even in a strick sillouette. My thought would be it might look pretty close to Enterprise-C, or a cross between the NX-01 and the NCC-1701-A.
Abrams should have some leeway, as much as we might want it to, the TOS NCC-1701 probably just would not translate well to a 2008 action film. It needs to shake off some cobwebs to bring in a new audience, and it has to if they are really spending over 150 million on this (which IS foolish I still think).
But there also has to be some continuity. If Nimoy is Spock, then he wasn't just on the TOS enterprise, but he was also on six movies which are all within everyones memory even the fairly young. The ship cannot stray too differently than what the movie enterprise would have looked like 25 years earlier.
That said, in Abrams defence- it isn't like Roddenberry didn't do EXACTLY the same thing. It is inconceivable that the TOS Enterprise and The Motion Picture Enterprise are the same ship. EVERYTHING about the ship is different, yet Roddenberry wanted us to believe that it was a refit Enterprise. Fair is fair, and you gotta cut Abrams a little slack... at least until we see some pics.
--------
-
I agree with everything you said, but I wonder why you think the budget is "foolish." I hope it's because $150 mil would be better spent giving real people shelter, food and medical care, not because it's higher than the movie's potential return.
-
Quote:
I am not one to censor people, but I think that James Cawley should have been quiet on this. He enjoys a following (I don't know how large) and making this statement now only stirs up trouble.
Further, Paramount has been fairly kind to him, it doesn't appear that they are vigorously going after the fan films like they could. He gets promotion on startrek.com, and also in the Star Trek magazine, both of which are controlled by the studio.
I don't begrudge him his "access", but I think it is unprofessional of him to spill a tidbit like this.
That being said, as long as it is out there-- this begs the question- just how different? I don't expect the ship to look like the TOS series ship, as least as far as surface, and even in a strick sillouette. My thought would be it might look pretty close to Enterprise-C, or a cross between the NX-01 and the NCC-1701-A.
Abrams should have some leeway, as much as we might want it to, the TOS NCC-1701 probably just would not translate well to a 2008 action film. It needs to shake off some cobwebs to bring in a new audience, and it has to if they are really spending over 150 million on this (which IS foolish I still think).
But there also has to be some continuity. If Nimoy is Spock, then he wasn't just on the TOS enterprise, but he was also on six movies which are all within everyones memory even the fairly young. The ship cannot stray too differently than what the movie enterprise would have looked like 25 years earlier.
That said, in Abrams defence- it isn't like Roddenberry didn't do EXACTLY the same thing. It is inconceivable that the TOS Enterprise and The Motion Picture Enterprise are the same ship. EVERYTHING about the ship is different, yet Roddenberry wanted us to believe that it was a refit Enterprise. Fair is fair, and you gotta cut Abrams a little slack... at least until we see some pics.
James Cawley's comments were on a private bbs to fellow NV people. If you're going to censor someone address it to the person who decided to make a news article out of it.
It's the product that Cawley Entertainment Company (and the hundreds that make that product happen) that is getting promoted by the Star Trek sites. It's that good, and they are acknowledging it.
Recast the original characters and we can live with it, redesign the Enterprise and it's like defacing the Mona Lisa.
Sorry, but that's how I feel about it.
-
If this is a prequel movie, then it would be set before the "historic" five year mission, before kirk took command, and after the series "enterprise", and so the ship would have to be updated from that show, but be before the original series began, so you have to expect some change, otherwise you would not have had the "d" or "e" type of sips, let alone the other classes.
-
Actually, it barely looked different, as already established (and already canon)... April had it 20 years before Kirk (with it looking nearly identical), and that was followed by Pike - also numerous years (11 if memory serves) before Kirk.
-
If this is a prequel movie, then it would be set before the "historic" five year mission, before kirk took command, and after the series "enterprise", and so the ship would have to be updated from that show, but be before the original series began, so you have to expect some change, otherwise you would not have had the "d" or "e" type of sips, let alone the other classes.
And now the endless nitpicking begins.
--------
"I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry
"...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry
you must register to view the forum.
--------
"I'd write my senator/congressman about this....but I can't find my checkbook."
(1)
| 
