To Boldy Go……

Upon reading all the comments and some fans backlash this morning after finally seeing the newly released image of J.J. Abram’s new Starship Enterprise, I wanted to breath a sigh of relief that " I could finally talk about the design" and yes, with a few changes this IS in fact the design I saw last year. But all the negativity I was reading got me thinking that I really needed to speak to my fellow fans about the new feature itself, beyond the new Enterprise. So let me start off by saying that Yes, this film will be different! And What is wrong with that?

That is probably a pretty strange sentiment coming from such a die hard, canon obsessed - whore fan as me! (lol, yes I can admit that!) You see, I want to put this new film into comparison with another high profile franchise that is doing quite well these days, and in the end see if you don’t agree with me.

Right now as I write this there are no less than 4 different versions of Batman available to the mainstream viewing audience. On tv we have "The Batman", "Batman: The Animated Series," The forthcoming "Batman: The Brave and The Bold" and of course "BATMAN" starring Adam West. There is also, the current successful film series (Batman Begins & Dark Knight) starring Christian Bale, and the Tim Burton era films. They are all wildly different interpretations of the character, and no one confuses one with the other, they are all Batman! And all of these enhance that franchise and all, to some degree, are successful.

So, why can’t Star Trek do the same? No one will confuse this new feature with The Original, or vice versa. This new feature will hopefully be a slam-bang adventure with some of Gene’s morals thrown in for good measure. This is simply another take on Trek. No one will punish the die hard fans, if in the end they enjoy it.

This New Trek, will hopefully serve to remind people why they Loved Star Trek so much to begin with. I believe it will re-awaken people to the fact that The Original Series was so good, and prompt them to buy the DVDs and get reacquainted with old friends. It will also, more importantly, introduce those legendary characters to a new generation of kids who have no idea who Kirk and Spock are, and what the heck is Star Trek.

I understand this is a new way of doing things, after all the Star Trek franchise was unique (with the possible exception of Star Wars). Trek is a single franchise that respected it’s own fictional universe and history and made each of it’s sequels fit fairly snugly (despite a few small errors over time) into it’s own 40 year canon, which is remarkable! That being said, Relax. The Original Series isn’t going anywhere. SO GO SEE THE NEW MOVIE! GIVE IT A CHANCE. This is a NEW STAR TREK! as a fan it really is okay if you like them both!

Quote:I get the distinct impression that to do the nacelles and secondary hull, someone stared at the USS Pasteur for a while. Just a thought. But even the Pasteur’s Bussard collectors had line of sight to open space, which the nacelles on this new ship don’t seem to have. Perhaps the designers didn’t know exactly how the different hardware bits worked (I violated this rule a little here and there, but I knew when I was doing it). Now I’m not being a whiner, just an informed critic. There’s room in this Trek world for healthy design criticism, as well as simply sitting back and enjoying a well made SF film. I -hope- the film is well written and clever and has good proportions of action, humor, tech, etc. but I’m also prepared to analyze the design work to see, perhaps, how far the shapes and colors and functions stray from 40 years of evolved gear.

Quote:I’m not going to get involved in the mud slinging, here, but needed to assure you guys and gals: we’ve built you a fine ship. To clarify: there’s a slight optical illusion occurring here, consequence of the “camera” angle. For Rick and others who worry the nacelles don’t have a clear line of sight over the disc — they, in fact, do. We were hardly working in a vacuum. I raided ILM reference photos like a madman. We were deferential to “inviolates” of Star Trek design vocabulary. Additionally, the profile here isn’t 100% representative, because, as you’ve noticed, the Bussards are dimmed. The true profile of the nacelles may or may not be revealed here, and that’s all I’ll say.

Quote:I went back and checked the Bussard clearance, and yeah, it works. I’ve seen a port side ortho[graphic] elevation, and I don’t have a problem with the mechanics of it, it’s the proportions and flows of the basic parts that look odd to me. Granted, no ship ever looks perfect in every ortho view, nor in every perspective view. We who have done this stuff in our sleep know that most vehicle and prop designs have their “best” faces. I’m not going to bore people with excerpts from my classical art and architecture books, though I will probably thumb through them here just to see if I can glean anything relevant. Like I said, I’ll wait to see how the film looks as a whole effort.