Enterprise to the original series??? -1 reply

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

krio2006

The Internet ends at GF

50 XP

25th May 2003

0 Uploads

108 Posts

0 Threads

#1 15 years ago

what do you think of the enterprise series,

i think the storey line works but the sets look too new compared to the original series sure they used alot of the stuff from TOS but it stil doesnt look right, it looks too TNG especial the lcars.

i was lookin forward to the series comin out but i was dissapointed... mow im lookin forward to a new series... i.e voyager etc




R2Destroyer

Mapper

50 XP

3rd November 2002

0 Uploads

326 Posts

0 Threads

#2 15 years ago

i realy agree about the "looking ahead of tos" BUT i can only justifi it as. the enterprise is the first..and they want it to look its best. BUT in TOS star ships are routine so less complicated /Fancy

do you think Enterprise looks a BIT like the enterprise in Final Fronter:p




psyhun

I post to get attention

50 XP

8th May 2003

0 Uploads

63 Posts

0 Threads

#3 15 years ago

They did an interview with Scott Bakula in the magazine Star Trek published by Titan Magazines about the Enterprise NX-01 looking more advanced than the original enterprise and this is a clip of the answer: "I haven't heard anybody complain about it. Obviously we had to admit that we couldn't go to a 150-year pre-version of the communicator, okay? Because everybody has got flip phones that are size of a quarter. You can't back up the technology that much. And if we backed it up technologically, we'd be shooting 1950s B-movies again with ship on strings. The audience is too sophisticated now. There's been a lot of careful consideration put into every choice that has been made. This ship is based on nuclear submarines that exist today, an extension of what that might be like in the future. What they have done to counteract some of the visual sophistication of the ship - which is certainly more sophisticated visually than what they had at their disposal in the 1960s - is that we are still pushing buttons, the doors aren't opening at our voice commands. We have a lot of computer technology and other wonderful technology, but the ship doesn't work perfectly. It's still a ship that has to be flown, it has to be manoeuvred by hand, and we're not just sitting around talking and having the ship run itself."




krio2006

The Internet ends at GF

50 XP

25th May 2003

0 Uploads

108 Posts

0 Threads

#4 15 years ago

i see what mean the ship does have alot of the original characteristics...

next time i see an episode i wil consider what u have said and appretiate it more.

any way what do you think of the cast.. i thought they picked a great actor for archer.

what do you think??




psyhun

I post to get attention

50 XP

8th May 2003

0 Uploads

63 Posts

0 Threads

#5 15 years ago

It's not wat I said but wat Scott Bakula said in the interview......... well can't say much about the crew as I've only tuned in to the show not very long ago............




T-65b

Incom management

50 XP

24th May 2003

0 Uploads

60 Posts

0 Threads

#6 15 years ago

Scott's full of it. Lmao. How is Enterprise based on a nuclear submarine? I could see if it looked like the Botney Bay or something, 'cause THAT looked like a nuclear submarine..but Enterprise doesn't even resemble it. I know -exactly- what they did. They brought out the new ships in First Contact, and waited a while, to see which new class got the best fan reviews. That class was the Akira. So, they took the Akira, and made it look a litle older, and called it Enterprise, because they figured the Akira had such good reviews from fans, that the 'NX-class' would too. They were wrong. ;x Then you get into 'phase cannons'..A technology that didn't even exist as of the first TOS episodes. The Enterprise was still using lasers. And starships still used lasers up until the late 2260s..The interior of the ship is fine. I have no gribes about the interior sets..but externally, the NX class just screams '24th century'. Enterprise needs to burn.




psyhun

I post to get attention

50 XP

8th May 2003

0 Uploads

63 Posts

0 Threads

#7 15 years ago

I just have to say, the NX ship does look more advance than the original Enterprise but if u really want a ship that looked even older than the original Enterprise......... then it will really look...... shall I say, not beautiful, I didn't really like the original Enterprise design, the two french fry and a pizza design(no offense)......... then tell me how will you like the ship to look like?? I can't think of any better looking design than the current design now..........




T-65b

Incom management

50 XP

24th May 2003

0 Uploads

60 Posts

0 Threads

#8 15 years ago

..NX-01 would look a lot like the Vulcan ships..Like the 'S.S. Enterprise' seen in the technical manuals.

"http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/schematics/prefed_ships.htm"

Check out the 'Enterprise Type'.

That's what Enterprise is supposed to look like. It's majestic and beautiful in it's own way, and looks a lot like the canon Vulcan ships of the era, not a 23rd centuray advanced starship.




psyhun

I post to get attention

50 XP

8th May 2003

0 Uploads

63 Posts

0 Threads

#9 15 years ago

[SIZE=2]Well they shouldn't have followed Vulcan design cause they wanted the first and best ship they have to be more like their own design instead of Vulcan-like..........




Chas_2003

I post to get attention

50 XP

9th April 2003

0 Uploads

71 Posts

0 Threads

#10 15 years ago

I think you should compare NX to the USS Enterprise in the movies. You've got to remember, the only reason why the NX seems more advanced is because the FX are a lot better! But in the movies the Original Enterprise looks much better and I personally think the feel of it is a lot more powerful. I mean, its looks so good, Enginering is massive, the warp core looks much better than in Enterprise. The bridge is bigger, the ship is bigger, in the motion picture you see the whole crew of the Enterprise, over 400 people. It looks and feels much bigger. Don't forget the Captain's quaters! But in Enterprise, it looks much smaller and cramped. I mean, I don't understand why people don't get the idea of Scott saying it was like a nuclear submarine. It is! Obviosuly bigger, but crapmed, dull and metallic. It was ment to be like that.

But even so, the technology is much more limited in Enterprise. They don't have shields, they don't have phasers, they didn't have photon torpedos when they first started out. They can only go Warp 5, they only have one transporter which is rarely used, they've only just got functing force fields, which they only used once. The ship only has 81 crew members!

Don't be fooled by Special Effects, what were you expecting, the same looks as the original series? Anyway, I think the special effects of the oringal series in the movies as much more compareable. By Star Trek 6, it looked great! The Enterprise-A looked much more powerful!

I personally think model ships look better than 3D ones. What looks more believable? The Enterprise-A from Star Trek 6 that came out in 1992, or Enterprise in Enterprise that came out in 2001?




  • 1
  • 2