*Spoilers* New (old) Enterprise for upcoming movie

Mr. Oragahn · Post by **Mr. Oragahn** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 2:37 pm

At this point, I have neither enough information about or understanding of what that time plot is and its repercussions on older canon, and how it fits with what we know.

So what? The new movie is the spiritually true predecessor to TNG and ignores TOS, or is it booting an entirely new timeline and ignores both TOS and TNG+?

To those who are in the know:
As someone who knows very little about TOS, ENT and TNG, is it going to be problematic to understand the flick?

l33telboi · Post by **l33telboi** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 7:06 pm

The movie is designed to catch the attention of people who know nothing about TOS, so yes, you'll be filled in on everything from characters to ships to... everything.

Also, the ship looks nice, and damn any and all other opinions:

Mr. Oragahn · Post by **Mr. Oragahn** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 7:49 pm

Mkay, I'm going to read that lengthy SBC thread though, to really get the gist of the plot.
Nice picture. Yes, I do find the "new" Enterprise style gorgeous.
And that space station is sexy.

ILikeDeathNote · Post by **ILikeDeathNote** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:52 pm

l33telboi wrote:The movie is designed to catch the attention of people who know nothing about TOS, so yes, you'll be filled in on everything from characters to ships to... everything.

Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. Exposition ahoy. A part of the reason why Enterprise failed is because it was going on the assumption that people would be watching it who would be new to Trek, though in that case rather than relying on exposition, they simply assumed the audience wouldn't care (though boy did Enterprise get exposition heavy too).

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 1:43 am

Just looking at the hi-res pic of the space station, the little band of windows in the ring structure around the sphere core's equator appears about 7 or so decks tall, which would make the core approximately 700-1000 meters in diameter, assuming 3-4 meter deck heights.

I have to get a bit of a chuckle at how the core of the station resembles the uncompleted Death Star seen at the end of RoTS.... ;-)
-Mike

watchdog · Post by **watchdog** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 8:22 pm

Here, in this exclusive first look at Abrams' take on the Enterprise, you see not only his vision of the ship but his attempt to evoke that sequence from the first film that so captured his imagination. If you're thinking, "Wow! It looks the way the Enterprise has always looked" -- well, look at the big Spock brain on you! Abrams wanted to take the original TV-series Enterprise and the movie-franchise Enterprise and fuse them together into a new yet familiar Enterprise. His ambition was a ship that felt very realistic, that could stand up to today's F/X standards -- and beyond. "If you're going to do Star Trek, there are many things you cannot change. The Enterprise is a visual touchstone for so many people. So if you're going to do the Enterprise, it better look like the Enterprise, because otherwise, what are you doing?"

That ship bears only a passing resemblance to either version of the Enterprise. I really think they could have done better, the ship is one of the characters of the show not just a vehicle.
What does the other ship that was mentioned at the begining of this thread look like? Chances are that I've seen it but still, I need a comparison.
So this movie basicaly rewrites Star Trek so that TOS never happened? Thats really........different. I thought it was a reimagining of the whole Trek universe, it could still be good, but if that is the ship, then it just went down a notch for me, so sad.

Mr. Oragahn · Post by **Mr. Oragahn** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:51 pm

I never agreed on the idea that one traveling into the past would find himself in the past of the continuity he belonged to, but would on the contrary, by the mere act of his trip, create a new version of the past, and therefore never affect the continuity he came from, but would just create a new continuity from there (there = altered past, originally understood as the genuine past).
Therefore you should never see stuff in the future disappearing because someone supposedly alters facts in this future's past.

Other than that, I get it, STXI is a reboot. Now, is there going to be a big reset in the end?

l33telboi · Post by **l33telboi** » Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:11 pm

Personally I would've preferred it if they hadn't kept the saucer and nacelle look.

Mr. Oragahn · Post by **Mr. Oragahn** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 5:31 am

l33telboi wrote:Personally I would've preferred it if they hadn't kept the saucer and nacelle look.

Yep, I like the curved underside of the TOS saucer, even if it's a waste of space.
The nacelles are just too big, and that super sleek War of the World design is too much.

I by far preferred the fan made design.

Now Oohoora is going to be damn hot, I'll go to the cinema to see her tits and hear slapstick jokes because Trek has certainly been about that.

ILikeDeathNote · Post by **ILikeDeathNote** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:47 am

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Now Oohoora is going to be damn hot, I'll go to the cinema to see her tits and hear slapstick jokes because Trek has certainly been about that.

If Abrams is thinking this will work, well...maybe he'll use it more smartly than Berman :p

watchdog · Post by **watchdog** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 2:11 pm

Had a bit of trouble viewing the trailer but now I've seen it I rather like it. The problem is trying to update Trek and stay true to the original concept. I am not impressed by the exterior of the ship specifically the smallness of the engineering section and the shape of the naccelles. I am not overly impressed with the look of the bridge but I can get over that. I will reserve further judgement until I have had a chance to learn more of the story.

Starfleet Jedi

Spoilers New (old) Enterprise for upcoming movie