Soldato
Well, so far Pike seems to be played as a character from an entirely different series - i.e. one with actual humour, characterisation and decent writing.
New Star Trek series - 2017
- Thread starter Spit
- Start date
Soldato
Thing is, SMG is a half-decent actress. But Bonehead is possibly the worst main character written for any sci-fi show, ever.
And I include the main characters for Andromeda in that as well
And I include the main characters for Andromeda in that as well
Soldato
I have to be (briefly) fair, that was pleasing to see.
Caporegime
Pleased to see they are listening to feedback.
Soldato
The more I think about this the more I can't help but think the STD approach to continuity is going from 'problematic' to 'unworkable'.
They've already shown a ship explicitly identified in-story as a D7. It looked like this:
Now, I'm sure even those of you who were rolling your eyes at my issues with the Enterprise redesign can appreciate that calling this ship a D7 and then showing a 'classic' D7 is a bit of a problem...
This isn't just STD re-doing the look of something from a previous Trek series. This is the first example of STD re-doing something from a previous season of STD
Will it be the last? I'm going to go ahead and guess 'nope' 
The more I think about this the more I can't help but think the STD approach to continuity is going from 'problematic' to 'unworkable'.
They've already shown a ship explicitly identified in-story as a D7. It looked like this:
Now, I'm sure even those of you who were rolling your eyes at my issues with the Enterprise redesign can appreciate that calling this ship a D7 and then showing a 'classic' D7 is a bit of a problem...
This isn't just STD re-doing the look of something from a previous Trek series. This is the first example of STD re-doing something from a previous season of STD
There is talk that all this is about the STD timeline overwriting the prime timeline with most of the Kelvin timeline. It's a way for Paramount and CBS to deal with the various TV/films rights issues and sort out the merchandising mess. They want to get rid of the old stuff that they can't sell, and come out with new stuff they can.
Soldato
Attempting to overwrite the Prime Universe timeline with your shiny new series is one thing...but shouldn't it at least be consistent with itself?
well fixing the Klingons is brilliant .The more I think about this the more I can't help but think the STD approach to continuity is going from 'problematic' to 'unworkable'.
They've already shown a ship explicitly identified in-story as a D7. It looked like this:
Now, I'm sure even those of you who were rolling your eyes at my issues with the Enterprise redesign can appreciate that calling this ship a D7 and then showing a 'classic' D7 is a bit of a problem...
This isn't just STD re-doing the look of something from a previous Trek series. This is the first example of STD re-doing something from a previous season of STD
Looking at the D7 shown it looks like a blueprint or an image being projected .
So my guess is that as the Klingons are united now They will be creating the fleet to look uniform and showing the designs .
Soldato
Again...they already called the ship in the picture I posted the D7. So unless you want to do some mental gymnastics to say that D7 means nothing...even though it consistently referred to Klingon ships of that shape, their other ships always being called something else...And then there's the ship that they called a Bird of Prey in season 1, which looks mostly like the Reman Scimitar from Nemesis re-done in miniature. Bets on that one ever making a reappearance in that form?
I've got no problem at all with Matt Jefferies' original D7 design making a comeback. But I don't see how they can resolve the previous D7 appearance change without simply ignoring what little continuity they've built up over the first season.
Nothing to say they can't reuse the designation .
The mini only looks a bit like the original but it's still called the mini. Same for the Beetle.
It makes more sense having that then just saying that's the ship and what we saw last season didn't exist .
The mini only looks a bit like the original but it's still called the mini. Same for the Beetle.
It makes more sense having that then just saying that's the ship and what we saw last season didn't exist .
Soldato
Right. So that would be a problem...but pretending that the Enterprise always looked like it does in STD (and was always larger scale than the 289m length shown in TOS!) is fine and dandy?
Yeah. Okay. Sure.
***edit***
As for your analogy regarding car nameplates - a more fitting analogy would be finding re-used class designations in naval fleets. And I don't believe that there are very many...
Soldato
It really isn't. Both the changes to the Enterprise and the D7 now apparently being two entirely different classes of vessel are a legacy of STD taking a 'who cares, just make it look cool and different' approach to visual continuity.
***edit***
Oh, and back to my point re: naval ship class names - please do try and find a situation where the same name has referred to two ship classes in the same navy within, say, 50 years of each other. Hint - you'll do well to find one. Then take that, and revel in the mild absurdity of the D7 class name referring to two entirely different vessels - one shown to exist in 2258, the other a whole ten years later in 2268.
Last edited:
The Enterprise is mostly the same aside from the scale .
They had to fit the ship in with the scales they made up for the new ships. The original Connie would look a bit too small otherwise.
But at least the Klingons now have hair and the ridges look more like they used to .
They had to fit the ship in with the scales they made up for the new ships. The original Connie would look a bit too small otherwise.
But at least the Klingons now have hair and the ridges look more like they used to .
Soldato
Apart from all the changes you mean? The saucer taper at the edges is different, the impulse engines are different, the connecting dorsal between the two hull sections is very different (to the point where at least two whole decks are missing as far as I can tell), the nacelle struts look like someone turned the ones from the movie era refit into novelty potato peelers with those slits in them, the nacelles themselves are different and the engineering hull is an entirely different shape with a huge 'landing strip' at the back for the shuttlebay. Quite why you'd need a landing strip in space is beyond me, but there I go again with bothersome things like stuff having to make sense...
The Enterprise:
The Discoprise:
I mean, the nacelles I could easily forgive...but where did the rest of the connecting dorsal between the saucer and the engineering hull go?!
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 45,009
Looks good.