That is the point, curvy is not as dramatic and therefor not as appealing to the general faddish movie lemmings so it has to go. JJTrek is not about tradition or continuity or or good storytelling or any of that kind of stuff, it is simply oneshot generic action schticks strung together with the "Star Trek" label slapped haphazardly on it.
Yeah, we all know this. Though, at least the ship designs in the first film were more Trek-ish in the lines, even if they were fugly.
There no need for the designs to be angular, this is only done so rounds bounce off it leaving little damage.
Two reason for this.
With the exception of torpedoes the weapons in TOS era and later are energy based so would not bounces of a ship with angular shape.
I would say that the hull material is design to absorb this energy. Once it hits it limit it is them damaged.
Secondly these ships have shield that stop an energy based weapon or physical weapon getting close to the ship. Again, this rule out the need for an angular design.
In the first JJ trek movie we did not really see shields, but then the Ent went up against a ship that is nearly 200 years more advanced. It would be like one of today’s Warships going up against a Warship form 200 years ago, that old ship would not even get into range to fire it own weapons let alone late five mins.
Also the Federation, Klingons and Romulans are also on the same level technical. This is also why they don’t have angular ships.
Fish, your original designs over the last several years have been soooooo much better than that thing they're putting on screen. It's a damned shame when "mere" fans have a better grasp of the design ethos than the "professionals" do...
I pretty much place JJ-Trek in the same category as the Transformers films, since he and Michael Bay are the same... lots of high-speed VFX-overladen action scenes, one-dimensional characters that are so hyper you think they have sugar for blood, some comic relief thrown in at awkward points in the film, no substantial plot of any sort, designs that bear almost no resemblance to the originals, and if they do, only do so grudgingly, and LENS FLARE... LOTS AND LOTS OF LENS FLARE!!!
In other words, I just watch these movies to see stuff blow up... I'm not expecting to get any level of thought out of them, like the original Trek films. Now that I see more of this movie, though... I am really wondering just how much of the Star Wars fan base JJ will end up pissing off.
Yeah, JJ and Michael Bay might as well be the same person. That's not to say I don't like some of their work, I just prefer when they don't mess with established franchises that I love. Of course, in Bay's defense, nobody has been able to duplicate the success of G1 Transformers, despite multiple tries. Though, I do wish he would try a little harder. (but that's a discussion for another thread)
I like the first movie OK. If you ignore the massive plot holes and just think of it as a dumb Sci-Fi action flick, it's not bad. Though, it's missing a lot of what makes Trek great. I was hoping things were going to settle down some for the sequel, but I don't think I'm getting that wish. If the movie is as barfy as the designs, I'll definitely be bashing it.
One thing I definitely relentlessly bashed in the first film is that thing they call the Enterprise. I still hate it. I'm actually happy to see it get all messed up in the preview.
Probably something even fuglier. Though, without seeing the movie, we can't be certain it gets totally destroyed. They may just fix it by the end of the movie. After all, they gave the 25-year-old cadet the keys to their fleet's flagship in the first film. I'm assuming this one takes place not too long after that one. So, if he destroys it that quickly, I don't think they'd give him another ship. Of course, I also didn't think they'd really make him captain by the end of the first film (without skipping some time) but I was wrong on that one. So, you never know. :rolleyes:
I never did get why every hero ship except Voyager and Defiant had to be a heavy cruiser called “Enterprise”.
TOS featured a unique situation of a young charismatic loose cannon captain being paired with a tough old bird of a ship that had a good reputation with the public but seemed to be cursed with “interesting times” from the point of view of Starfleet and the combination actually worked. Abrams discarded all of that for his silly “Top Gun” style loner captain gets a brand new but somehow famous even before it does anything lucky “flagship” heavy cruiser. And his crew hates him and only does things grudgingly of course; what a recipe for getting the best out of them!
In the 2009 movie the action was good if mostly pointless, the SFX while a bit overblown and polished with a heavy waxy coating of kitsch and cliche is not too terribly bad either. If Abrams could do something to get rid of the totally brainless plot and script part it might make a good almost Star Trek movie. Unfortunately the previews look to continue the style of the 2009 with no improvement.
Trek design has always been hit or miss. While Phase II never happened, most of us have seen concept art for what the Enterprise was supposed to be. Not all that pretty, though some of the ideas made it into Eaves' legendary Connie Refit design for TMP. The K'Tinga is awesome. Reliant was a very cool design, different from what we'd seen before. Excelsior had her good points, but frankly I always thought she was too fat in the middle. The BoP is classic. As for TNG, there are aspects of the Galaxy I really like (the neck, the primary deflector array), and aspects I hate (fat, stubby little nacelles, look like those bubble gum cigars from my childhood). The Soverign is, to my mind, just about perfect. Voyager is good, except for the stupid short nacelles. And the JJ-prise? As with most of the others, great in some respects, less so in others.
Then we have this other...thing. The one that appears to have been lifted from Descent Freespace or Wing Commander Prophecy outright and projected on the big screen (in terms of the apparent low poly count). I'm just not loving it. Maybe the plot will explain it looking so dumb. Or, for that matter, being so much larger than the flagship.
Either way, whether I love ST:ID or not, I still have Star Trek II and III...
Oh yeah, there are some fugly ships from the "Prime" Trek universe. They did some really dreadful hybrid designs for DS9, when they were at war with the Dominion. A lot of them were supposed to look like they "fixed" ships by using parts from other broken ships, and they created a lot of hybrid designs. I hate most of them:
I don't like any of those. Plus, I'm not so fond of some of the alien designs. But, I know they had limited budget and had to rebuild a lot of their alien ships to make new ones, so I let them slide on a lot of those. So, it's not like JJ Trek was the first with bad designs, but I found those that I don't like out of 47 years of Star Trek. I despise practically ever design from the first JJ Trek movie. I like the Kelvin and the shuttles. The starbase was also pretty cool. The rest, I don't like. That includes the "Enterprise," the Kelvin kitbashes, the "Jellyfish" and the Narada.
Not all that pretty, though some of the ideas made it into Eaves' legendary Connie Refit design for TMP.
That would be Andy Probert, not John Eaves. I'm sure that's what you meant to type, but I don't want anybody who doesn't know that to read that and think it was Eaves.
In fact, a lot of Matt Jefferies' refit ideas for the Phase II ship made it into the TMP refit, because Probert used what Jefferies had already designed as a starting point. The biggest issue with the Phase II refit was that it didn't have enough detail for a feature film, where you're seeing the ship much larger than you do on a TV screen. So, they had Probert come in and "finish" the design. He kept a lot of Jefferies' ideas, such as the overall shapes, he just changed a lot of the details and added a lot of things that weren't there in Jefferies' design. So, you can really say that the finished ship was a collaborative effort, with Jefferies doing the early work and Probert doing the later work.
Out of all the kit bashes to come out of the DS9, I alway thought the Curry Class was the best one.
Due to the look of the ship, It more of Starfleet version of Boeing C-17A Globemaster III, than a front line battleship. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-17A_Globemaster_III
As for the Ent-J, yeah that is a fugly ship, but I don't see that as the desgin that will be the Ent-J.
Reason being is that it is one possiable future. Untill the PTB make a TV/ Movie in that era with that ship being the Ent-J. But that won't happen seeing JJ has gone and done his reboot. so it not likely we will see anything from the Prime Universe again.
Either way, whether I love ST:ID or not, I still have Star Trek II and III...
yes trek design can be very variable, some are fantastic(the klingon BOP,the romulan valdore,the reman scimitar,dominion battlecruiser, klingon vorcha, klingon raptor, romulan d'deridex, ... )
but others are awful(many starfleet ships, won't be listing them all here).
to me the abrams ships in the last trek film(the one before into darkness) do not look vastly different from normal ones, the enterprise still has a saucer and nacelles in roughly the same arrangement, the klingon warbird glimpsed in the simulator is almost identical to kronos 1 from star trek VI .
you mention star trek II and III, i was not a fan of II but III is a damn good film, shame that the battle between the enterprise and the BOP couldn't be longer with more action though. as a film(ignore that it is supposed to be trek) into darkness couldbe one of the best things this year(just mentally replace the words, klingon,federation,romulan,kirk,enterprise,starfleet,spock,vulcan,scotty,bones,warp and phasers when you watch it).
The size difference didn't seem that extreme in the preview. Though, that poster has the wrong date on it. The movie is opening on the 17th, not the 15th. So, if that's wrong, I wonder what else is wrong.
The vengence only looks to be twice as big as the enterprise in all the clips I have seen, that poster is a classic case of artistic licence.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking also. In fact, I wonder who even did that and if it's "official." The incorrect date makes me think it's not. Official stuff has to go through too many approvals for nobody to have noticed something I noticed at first glance. (but I could be wrong :rolleyes:)
Posts
Yeah, we all know this. Though, at least the ship designs in the first film were more Trek-ish in the lines, even if they were fugly.
One is designed for exploration, and one designed for war.
Two reason for this.
With the exception of torpedoes the weapons in TOS era and later are energy based so would not bounces of a ship with angular shape.
I would say that the hull material is design to absorb this energy. Once it hits it limit it is them damaged.
Secondly these ships have shield that stop an energy based weapon or physical weapon getting close to the ship. Again, this rule out the need for an angular design.
In the first JJ trek movie we did not really see shields, but then the Ent went up against a ship that is nearly 200 years more advanced. It would be like one of today’s Warships going up against a Warship form 200 years ago, that old ship would not even get into range to fire it own weapons let alone late five mins.
Also the Federation, Klingons and Romulans are also on the same level technical. This is also why they don’t have angular ships.
In other words, I just watch these movies to see stuff blow up... I'm not expecting to get any level of thought out of them, like the original Trek films. Now that I see more of this movie, though... I am really wondering just how much of the Star Wars fan base JJ will end up pissing off.
Who is bashing you for that? Certainly not the majority of people who have commented in this thread.
I guess you missed all the xmas/new year excitment a few pages back.
I think you might be blowing, what looked like a single person disagreeing with you, a little out of proportion...
Join our fancy Discord Server!
All I said was I got bashed for disliking JJ Trek. How's that blowing things out of proportion??
Actually, don't answer that. I don't think I wanna open that can of worms.
One thing I definitely relentlessly bashed in the first film is that thing they call the Enterprise. I still hate it. I'm actually happy to see it get all messed up in the preview.
The question is, what will they replace it with? Another identical JJ-Prise, or something even fuglier?
TOS featured a unique situation of a young charismatic loose cannon captain being paired with a tough old bird of a ship that had a good reputation with the public but seemed to be cursed with “interesting times” from the point of view of Starfleet and the combination actually worked. Abrams discarded all of that for his silly “Top Gun” style loner captain gets a brand new but somehow famous even before it does anything lucky “flagship” heavy cruiser. And his crew hates him and only does things grudgingly of course; what a recipe for getting the best out of them!
In the 2009 movie the action was good if mostly pointless, the SFX while a bit overblown and polished with a heavy waxy coating of kitsch and cliche is not too terribly bad either. If Abrams could do something to get rid of the totally brainless plot and script part it might make a good almost Star Trek movie. Unfortunately the previews look to continue the style of the 2009 with no improvement.
Then we have this other...thing. The one that appears to have been lifted from Descent Freespace or Wing Commander Prophecy outright and projected on the big screen (in terms of the apparent low poly count). I'm just not loving it. Maybe the plot will explain it looking so dumb. Or, for that matter, being so much larger than the flagship.
Either way, whether I love ST:ID or not, I still have Star Trek II and III...
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Curry_type
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Yeager_type
There are more than two, but those are ones I can find pages for with pictures so that I don't have to do screen caps from my DS9 DVDs.
As for "canon" ships that the intentionally built, I don't like any of these:
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Prometheus_class
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Cheyenne_class
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(NCC-1701-J)
I don't like any of those. Plus, I'm not so fond of some of the alien designs. But, I know they had limited budget and had to rebuild a lot of their alien ships to make new ones, so I let them slide on a lot of those. So, it's not like JJ Trek was the first with bad designs, but I found those that I don't like out of 47 years of Star Trek. I despise practically ever design from the first JJ Trek movie. I like the Kelvin and the shuttles. The starbase was also pretty cool. The rest, I don't like. That includes the "Enterprise," the Kelvin kitbashes, the "Jellyfish" and the Narada.
That would be Andy Probert, not John Eaves. I'm sure that's what you meant to type, but I don't want anybody who doesn't know that to read that and think it was Eaves.
In fact, a lot of Matt Jefferies' refit ideas for the Phase II ship made it into the TMP refit, because Probert used what Jefferies had already designed as a starting point. The biggest issue with the Phase II refit was that it didn't have enough detail for a feature film, where you're seeing the ship much larger than you do on a TV screen. So, they had Probert come in and "finish" the design. He kept a lot of Jefferies' ideas, such as the overall shapes, he just changed a lot of the details and added a lot of things that weren't there in Jefferies' design. So, you can really say that the finished ship was a collaborative effort, with Jefferies doing the early work and Probert doing the later work.
Due to the look of the ship, It more of Starfleet version of Boeing C-17A Globemaster III, than a front line battleship.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-17A_Globemaster_III
As for the Ent-J, yeah that is a fugly ship, but I don't see that as the desgin that will be the Ent-J.
Reason being is that it is one possiable future. Untill the PTB make a TV/ Movie in that era with that ship being the Ent-J. But that won't happen seeing JJ has gone and done his reboot. so it not likely we will see anything from the Prime Universe again.
I like the Centaur, that was a pretty cool kitbash.
yes trek design can be very variable, some are fantastic(the klingon BOP,the romulan valdore,the reman scimitar,dominion battlecruiser, klingon vorcha, klingon raptor, romulan d'deridex, ... )
but others are awful(many starfleet ships, won't be listing them all here).
to me the abrams ships in the last trek film(the one before into darkness) do not look vastly different from normal ones, the enterprise still has a saucer and nacelles in roughly the same arrangement, the klingon warbird glimpsed in the simulator is almost identical to kronos 1 from star trek VI .
you mention star trek II and III, i was not a fan of II but III is a damn good film, shame that the battle between the enterprise and the BOP couldn't be longer with more action though. as a film(ignore that it is supposed to be trek) into darkness couldbe one of the best things this year(just mentally replace the words, klingon,federation,romulan,kirk,enterprise,starfleet,spock,vulcan,scotty,bones,warp and phasers when you watch it).
star-trek-into-darkness-imax-poster.jpg
...Close enough.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking also. In fact, I wonder who even did that and if it's "official." The incorrect date makes me think it's not. Official stuff has to go through too many approvals for nobody to have noticed something I noticed at first glance. (but I could be wrong :rolleyes:)