CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPORTS, GAMES & LEISURE › Television › STAR TREK: DISCOVERY (2017)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

STAR TREK: DISCOVERY (2017) - Page 4

post #151 of 608
Thread Starter 
Star Trek universe is filled with powerful godlike beings like Q and Apollo. It's only practical to an extent.

Though JJ's two films really veer off into total nonsense.

"I can't beam them off a moving object!"
"Can you beam one down?"

Huh?????????
post #152 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

I've never been fond of the D either. It looks like something from that awful era in the '90s when everybody was trying to make consumer electronics look like...well, the Enterprise-D, come to think of it. It looks like its own bath toy.

That said, while the refit is sleek as all hell, my One True Enterprise is always going to be The Original:



Ohhh yes. That is one sexy-ass starship.


Please, if you're a devotee of the design, that means part of the appeal comes from the way light hits it. Don't post a tarted up CG cartoon of it, post an original series frame grab.

post #153 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

I only got to see one ep of B5 before Netflix took it down.

Hadn't seen FARSCAPE since the 90s when it was brand new.


Just finished rewatching B5 for the first time a couple months back. Actually, first time to go all the way through because season 5 originally caused me to give up after years of loyal viewing. IF you can get by the vfx, and IF you can get by the nondescript art direction, and IF you can accept Boxleitner as compelling (the last is the biggest leap of faith), you can probably really like B5. It gets kind of boring realizing what movie JMS saw the week he wrote a particular episode, since he recycles a lot of dialog, but hey he wrote something like 3 full seasons without help, something had to suffer.

 

I'm still troubled by all of the B5/DS9 uncomfortable similarities, but my main issue is that I just really totally and completely bought off on the original lead, the late Michael O'Hare, so bringing in the American equivalent to Roger Moore to run B5 was something I never got on board with.

 

Except for PKTECHGIRL, I don't think I've seen a FARSCAPE in over a decade, but I"m not sure why. I know that it has no-blur space scenes that drove me bugfuck with annoyance, but I remember being massively entertained too.

post #154 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmart View Post

Please, if you're a devotee of the design, that means part of the appeal comes from the way light hits it. Don't post a tarted up CG cartoon of it, post an original series frame grab.
I tried, man, but it's fershlugginer impossible to find actual un-tarted TOS screencaps apparently. Goddamn "remastering" assholes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

It's such a weirdly designed ship. If you were truly going to explore space, your ship wouldn't be a cylinder and two little sticks mounted on a giant glowing weak spot.



What's all this imagination crap in my sci fi?! I want practicality!!!
"Practicality" is a C-130 and a Concorde having sex?
post #155 of 608
More than the enterprise design? Very obviously yes.
post #156 of 608
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

I tried, man, but it's fershlugginer impossible to find actual un-tarted TOS screencaps apparently. Goddamn "remastering" assholes.

TrekCore is your friend: http://tos.trekcore.com/hd/thumbnails.php?album=58

They had the decency to take screencaps of both original and "enhanced" effects. They didn't for the first season though, since they took caps off the HD-DVD back in 2007, which didn't include the option to watch original effects like the later blu-ray releases.

Anyway, here's the OG Enterprise.

post #157 of 608
Ah, bless you, sir.
post #158 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmart View Post
 

I'm still troubled by all of the B5/DS9 uncomfortable similarities, but my main issue is that I just really totally and completely bought off on the original lead, the late Michael O'Hare, so bringing in the American equivalent to Roger Moore to run B5 was something I never got on board with.

 

 

I'm the reverse. Couldn't get into O'Hare but my interest in the show trippled when they brought in Boxleitner, just because I thought Sheridan was awesome. 

post #159 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post
 

 

I'm the reverse. Couldn't get into O'Hare but my interest in the show trippled when they brought in Boxleitner, just because I thought Sheridan was awesome. 

 

Sheridan > Sisko and I will fight anyone who says differently. 

 

B5 had a much smaller budget than DS9 but they really went for it in terms of the epic scope of the story.  I've gone on and on about how much I love about this show elsewhere so I won't gush about it here. 

post #160 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

Aka: Ben Sisko's Motherfuckin' Pimp Hand.

(Secret SFDebris fan handshake)
post #161 of 608

So I guess we need to start posting our customized Star Trek Online ships, right?

post #162 of 608

I don't think there are enough free pages left for Reasor's contributions. 

post #163 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

It's such a weirdly designed ship.  If you were truly going to explore space, your ship wouldn't be a cylinder and two little sticks mounted on a giant glowing weak spot.





What's all this imagination crap in my sci fi?!  I want practicality!!!

Practicality? Aerodynamic control surfaces on a vehicle that spends 99% of it's time in deep space is the OPPOSITE of practicality. This is why we're going back to capsules instead of another lifting body design in real life - the shuttle's tail, wings, and engines were dead weight for 95% of its mission.

Even if you're considering atmospheric operations, presumably you'd want to plan for a range of planets and so couldn't count on an atmospheric density that would provide meaningful lift, so direct powered descent (like SpaceX is doing for their 1st stage recoveries) is the only practical option. No wings. No aerodynamic surfaces. It's all dead weight.
post #164 of 608
Olmos, you kick ass.
post #165 of 608
Thread Starter 
Anyone see the Smithsonian display of the original 1701 model that got restored? It's gorgeous.

post #166 of 608
*drool*
post #167 of 608

That is just an amazing job they did on that model. Any model I could ever build would never look as awesome as that one.

post #168 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

Olmos, you kick ass.

Thanks commodore, but I'm honestly just a giant nerd.
post #169 of 608
Quote:
 Sheridan > Sisko and I will fight anyone who says differently.

 

Racist.

post #170 of 608
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headless Fett View Post

Sheridan > Sisko and I will fight anyone who says differently.


post #171 of 608

Bring it.

 

post #172 of 608
Thread Starter 
tumblr_muh1ubE3zY1suehbpo2_250.gif
post #173 of 608
I'm a Jeffrey Sinclair guy.

post #174 of 608

THREE DAY DANCE TO DETERMINE THE #1 STATION CHAMPION OF THE UNIVERSE!

post #175 of 608
Thread Starter 
55077669.jpg
post #176 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by mondguy View Post

I'm a Jeffrey Sinclair guy.

 


Nice to know I'm not 'all alone in the night' on that one.

post #177 of 608
This is the embarrassing part where I say I was joking in order to create controversy. Sorry man.

(I don't dislike Sinclair though)
post #178 of 608

No worries, my wife still loves O'Hare as JDS, so I can (and do) live with that comfortably.

post #179 of 608

Now it's time to REALLY stir the pot by admitting that I think Enterprise has the best opening sequence and theme song of the franchise.

post #180 of 608

I'll back you on Sequence, because it actually is a sequence and not just a montage. But... Song?

post #181 of 608

It's a good song, damn it!

post #182 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyB79 View Post
 

Now it's time to REALLY stir the pot by admitting that I think Enterprise has the best ... theme song of the franchise.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyB79 View Post
 

It's a good song, damn it!

 

post #183 of 608

There was an article in the entertainment section of my local newspaper comparing DS9 to Deadwood.  *violent swearing ensues*

 

Sometimes I really do feel all alone in the night with my B5 fandom. Except on here.

post #184 of 608

Fuckin' heathen hoopleheads.

post #185 of 608
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post

I'll back you on Sequence, because it actually is a sequence and not just a montage. But... Song?

Yeah, the actual sequence itself is pretty remarkable.

The producers originally wanted U2's "Beautiful Day" for the title sequence, but the band doesnt want any of their songs used for TV main titles. I'm guessing using existing pop songs was a trend at the time? I can only recall CSI shows as an example.
post #186 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post

I'll back you on Sequence, because it actually is a sequence and not just a montage. But... Song?

With the original slow tempo it was aces. When they gave it the sped up drum track to be more upbeat it was trash.
post #187 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post

With the original slow tempo it was aces. When they gave it the sped up drum track to be more upbeat it was trash.

 

Agreed. Destroyed the impact of that one shot of a delta-wing ship.

post #188 of 608
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post

With the original slow tempo it was aces. When they gave it the sped up drum track to be more upbeat it was trash.

Which was so strange because of how dark that season was, it seemed a weird decision to go for an upbeat take.

*Archer watches his home blow up before his eyes, he starts to lose it, cut to upbeat song*
post #189 of 608
I liked both versions of the song.
post #190 of 608

It shouldn't have had a song. The Mirror Universe episode's opening with the orchestral track was the best.

post #191 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post


With the original slow tempo it was aces. When they gave it the sped up drum track to be more upbeat it was trash.


That I agree with. I also don't think they should've belatedly appended the "Star Trek" to the title.

post #192 of 608
Thread Starter 
Of all the spinoffs, I think only DS9 really didn't need "Star Trek" in the title.

"Enterprise" as the title itself works, cause it's pretty synonymous with Star Trek like "The Dark Knight" is for "Batman", at least IMO.
post #193 of 608
"[Fuller] also confirmed that the series will take place ten years before Star Trek: The Original Series, and will center on some sort of 'major, previously undepicted event in the Trek mythos' that is neither the founding of the Federation’s secret black ops unit Section 31, the Kobayashi Maru, or the oft-mentioned Romulan War. (The meticulously kept Star Trek wiki Memory Alpha lists 'The Treaty of Armens is established between the Sheliak Corporate and the United Federation of Planets' as the most notable event of 2255, so get hyped for some hot treaty-signing action, we guess.) Fuller went on to tell his audience, 'As a Star Trek fan: There’s an incident, an event that had been talked about but never really fully explored' that the show will be digging into, and then said nothing more."

http://avc.lu/2b9myx6
Edited by Agentsands77 - 8/10/16 at 7:35pm
post #194 of 608

Can't wait to see the first proper teaser for this.

post #195 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agentsands77 View Post

"[Fuller] also confirmed that the series will take place ten years before Star Trek: The Original Series, and will center on some sort of 'major, previously undepicted event in the Trek mythos' that is neither the founding of the Federation’s secret black ops unit Section 31, the Kobayashi Maru, or the oft-mentioned Romulan War. (The meticulously kept Star Trek wiki Memory Alpha lists 'The Treaty of Armens is established between the Sheliak Corporate and the United Federation of Planets' as the most notable event of 2255, so get hyped for some hot treaty-signing action, we guess.) Fuller went on to tell his audience, 'As a Star Trek fan: There’s an incident, an event that had been talked about but never really fully explored” that the show will be digging into, and then said nothing more.'

http://avc.lu/2b9myx6

Any encounters with the Organians pre-Kirk? Besides the Romulan War (which I'm glad he's ruling out) I'm at a loss.
post #196 of 608

I honestly can't believe they haven't cast leads at this point.  They're shooting September.

post #197 of 608

I'm sure we'll hear something soon.

post #198 of 608
Thread Starter 
...Anaxar?
post #199 of 608

Anaxar and the Romulan War were both eliminated as possibilities by Fuller.

post #200 of 608
Thread Starter 
Figured. The very setting of this may have played a factor in why they went after the Anaxar fan project as that would have taken place in the same time period.

I guess this means the return of pilot uniforms.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Television
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPORTS, GAMES & LEISURE › Television › STAR TREK: DISCOVERY (2017)