July 10, 2001, 6:58 p.m. CST
The prints were to dark !
July 10, 2001, 7:01 p.m. CST
Shit ! I mean you cant see a damn thing !
July 10, 2001, 7:03 p.m. CST
The sets look great-not smooth and polished but with a lot of naked pipes and handholds everywhere. The light gray color is a bit of a downer though-kind of like the Voyager look-but at least all the walls have multiple panels-sort of like the International Space Station. And Engineering looked fantastic-reminded me of the Defiant or TOS because of the long catwalk and pipes at head-height. Nicest thing though was the Captain's chair-beautifully done-the sort of a synthesis of the Kirk movie chair with TOS armrests and the buttons on edge of the armrests. It looks great-hope the stories also turn out good!
July 10, 2001, 7:10 p.m. CST
For some cideo that wasn't aired on television. Has a great view of the bridge. http://www.entertainmenttonight.com/television/a4451.htm
July 10, 2001, 7:24 p.m. CST
Just gotta say-I've been sort of down about this series- because 1-Brannon and Braga, 2-the ship looks way too new, 3-the Time villain(too much like Galactica 1980), and 4-Purple Uniforms(what is this Star Trek: The New Power Generation?-Prince reference). But seeing my bud Bakula in the Captain's chair just makes me smile. I still have warm feelings for Quantum Leap from when I was a kid( not the ones where he's in a dress but the ones where he saved his brother or his friends always got to me) and seeing him walking around the new Ship just makes me feel good. I am definitely going to watch this show at least to the half season mark.
July 10, 2001, 7:26 p.m. CST
by Pizza The Hut
I have a real problem buying this pre-TOS thing... The ship is looking WAAAAYYY too modern to be pre-Constitution Class NCC-1701. But now on to the sets... They reminded me of a cross between DS9, Defiant, and Voyager, with some new twists, but certainly nothing, NOTHING at all like the original enterpoop, and certainly nothing like something I'd envision an earlier version to be like. ...and then theres the flat-panel computer screens everywhere on the bridge... Huh???... Again, too futuristic looking for being pre-TOS. I think whoever was the brains behind the set designs, set colors, and ship design really missed a BIG opportunity here to do something other than mainstream NEXT GEN material. This is SUPPOSED to me a prequel, isn't it??? Oh, well... I may be pleasantly surprised... Plus, it will still probably be better than 98% of everything else on TV.
July 10, 2001, 8:48 p.m. CST
Looking at the ship I am confounded again. If you look at the mid point between the nacelles (where the blue dot is), the shadow shows that section going down while the nacelles shadows show them going up. I'm trying to figure the side view out in my head.
July 10, 2001, 10:19 p.m. CST
Hey Coop-I think someone on the other talkback suggested that that part is lower than the saucer but the nacelles do go up-near to the level of the saucer. So you got it right, man! Anyone notice on the ET interview that the "ready room" is actually a little sunken area behind the captain's chair-just like in B5:Crusade's Excalibur? Also check out the cool little 5 inch size LCD screens that are only a few inches thick hanging off the bridge walls-everywhere-at least it's not like DS9 or Voyager where it just looked like a bunch of TV screens stuck in the wall. And I like that there are all kinds of sizes of screens everywhere- in just one shot there were at least four different sizes of displays-excellent! There's no carpeting and there are pipes, handholds, ladders and brushed steel everywhere-really a bare bones mean looking interior- and I like the big giant hinged doors with the airtight locking levers on them. Still kind of wished that they had the red doors. Sigh.
July 10, 2001, 10:59 p.m. CST
Gene lived in the day and age where the technology wasn't available to present the future in an "ultra-futuristic" way. Today, we have touch screens, flat panels, awesome computer power, and visual effects. Back then Gene had to work with thimbals for buttons, and balsa wood and vacuum tubes for models and special effects. Now, for all you people that are complaining----"oh, it looks too futuristic and doesn't look like it was before the TOS. I can't see why they can't go back to using thimbals for buttons." Ok people, get your heads screwed on straight. Paramount is using top-notch effects, sets, etc to make it more cool, modern, and REALISTIC based on present thoughts and expectations about the future 150 years from now. Yes, you saw touch screens, panels, monitors, and futuristic set materials because we have the damn technology now to implement these things into a future warp driven ship(if it were to become possible). Back then, they tryed to do the same thing: make it look realistic compared to their visions and perceptions of what the future could hold compared to their own technology. They thought: "Let's put buttons on panels to make it look so futuristic!" Duh, and it worked. I wish you people would realize these things. By the way, I thought the cramped quarters looked awesome and REALISTIC concerning the present visions of what the future could hold.
July 10, 2001, 11:09 p.m. CST
by Toby O Notoby
Hands up anyone who actually wants to see exposed mainframe computers with light emitting diodes. Anyone? Anyone? (I can just hear Bill Shatners comeback now: "Oh, cut the bleeding heart crap, will ya? We've all got our switches, lights, and knobs to deal with".)
July 10, 2001, 11:18 p.m. CST
I kneel before Z0D! Also I think that the fact that this enterprise is so loaded with panels and screens makes the bare walls of TOS, TNG, and VOY seem like a logical progression to a bigger and more refined ship. After all it would make sense to have less displays in a future ship if you channeled everything minor through the computer. On this enterprise all you see are little panels in the walls with god-knows-what in them and screens, handholds, pipes and ladders everywhere else. It also brings home the 'we don't have a lot of space to work with' feeling. I love this ship.
July 11, 2001, 5:23 a.m. CST
Not to sound like a dickhead or anything Soylent Green, but TOS was made in the 60's. I for one agree with both you and Z0D. I'm sure if they had the funds back in the 60's...TOS would have looked a hell of a lot different. Not to mention...how advanced our technology has come. We can do things now that Gene could only dream of.
July 11, 2001, 6:23 a.m. CST
because, as everyone has pointed out, you can't make the sets look older than TOS without making them look like they invented the Enterprise in the 1960's. I've got a better looking tricorder in my pocket right now. It's called a pda, and you can buy two-way communicators for less than $50 apiece. You could easily make them small enough to fit on an insignia badge, too. How am I supposed to believe any sort of show that has technology older than what I am currently using - yet claims to be set in the future? At the same time, if it doesn't look older than TOS, with knobs and flip switches and vacuum tubes sticking out all over the place, all the fanboys gripe about it being too futuristic. Ya just can't win, and making a sequel set later in time, after the collapse of the Federation or something would have been a better idea, imho.
July 11, 2001, 7:28 a.m. CST
Look carefully at the rendering of the shadows. Looks to me like the saucer section is the lowest part, and the "blue dot" between the nacelles (maybe the bridge?) is either at the nacelle level or just below. In other words, seen from the front, NX-01 would look like a big W on a plate! Anyway, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
July 11, 2001, 9:16 a.m. CST
Here's a thought on the ship configuration...WAIT TILL A SIDE VIEW PICTURE OF IT COMES OUT, UNTIL THEN, GET ON WITH YOUR LIVES! Ah, glad I got that out of my system, I picure some of you being like that group of kids on Galaxy Quest...And another good way to make it look pre TOS, lets film it with and 8mm camcorder, that'll give it a good feel...And like GeekGrrrl was saying (sorry if I didn't get the name right), some of the technology from TNG we almost have now. I haven't really been keeping track of what their doing with it, but the show sounds like it going to be pretty good... SO SOME YOU JUST NEED TO RELAX AND REMEMBER, IT'S A TELEVISION SHOW!! FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES!! BE ENTERTAINED!!! and go watch Farscape in the meantime...good stuff!
July 11, 2001, 10:29 a.m. CST
They will run into many continuity problems with this show trying to be faithful with TOS and with modern technology. The one way they can kind of get around this is of course to imply a change of the timeline after the NCC-1701-E visit in
July 11, 2001, 11:11 a.m. CST
Some of your people are clueless. After telling us that Enterprise would be fresh and new, like nothing seen before, Berman has shoveled us more of the tired old sets and design that we've been subjected to for the past 15 years. Talk about old and booooring. And does it look like a prequel, prior to classic Star Trek? Hell no, looks like something on Voyager or a Nasa training film. And you can cry "production values...blah blah blah....more money in the budget...blah blah blah.." all day long. You CAN create new, good looking sets that give a hint of things to come in the original Star Trek. But you boneheads want to think that Trek is real. That we have touchpads now in THIS reality, so Trek will look old if it doesnt feature them in it's FICTIONAL reality. Fiction isn't reality people. We havent had a WWIII, and I havent noticed Khan taking over Australia yet. It is fiction. You have an established look of Treks past, like it or not, in the original series. It is the FICTIONAL reality of Star Trek. That should dictate the design, not today's modern world. But you use good creative design with modern production materials. The U.S.S. Enterprise in Ds9's Trials and Tribbleations looked damn good. It can be done, they just cant seem to cut the apron strings to the design concepts of the 24th century. Laziness or incompetance, I'm not sure which. But it's not a hard concept to understand. But it is to those of you who would rather see Russell Crowe, fighting as a gladiator in Yankee Stadium, because its newer and was built with modern technology. Or lets put Nikes on the feet of the soldiers in Glory. Sure they didn't have them back then, but the actors will be much more comfortable.....geez, you fanboys are so smitten when it comes to "kick-ass" looking space ships you can't even see that a futuristic 24th century ship in a pre original Trek era is wrong. And that, sadly, is the scariest part of all!
July 11, 2001, 12:16 p.m. CST
Sid, didn't you watch ET? Didn't you see that the ship is mas pequena del Voyager? If you don't understand Spanish, let me translate. The sets don't look like anything we have had before in Voy, TNG, or TOS. But they come close to the size of those of the Defiant. In other words, they are smaller and more compact and look totally like they were made of the materials the Cochrane rocket was made of. Shiny metal that isn't covered by carpet, plastic, or foam. Please forgive me, but someone in this discussion said that there were all these displays providing readouts of all the ships critical functions. That's realistic! If we would have had pastel colors put on the walls of this NX-01, would that look realistic to you? HELL NO! The space stations of today are metal, with knobs, computer screens, readouts, etc and are made of metal! Oh, and what viewer (any viewer for that matter) outside the Trek universe would believe that our potential future is made of space ships with knobs and pastel colored building materials? That was the idea back then (60s), but not now. Let me tell you that Gene made the show to portray his vision of what he wanted humanity to achieve in terms of morals, ethics, science, exploration, one human "race" etc, etc. Sure, you can keep things constant, like the sets and costumes. But wait! We live in a time where it is necessary to use current technology to more accurately represent our possible future. Sure, it would've been nice to make everything mesh together and make sense. But in order for that to happen, we the viewers have to use our imagination on how we would see the future by using these shows as a guide. Gene and Berman have given us the tools to help us imagine a better world where everyone gets together. Things could have been done better on Voyager, but I enjoyed it none-the-less because it freed my mind. Imagination is one of the keys to our survival as a human race. Sure, Trek is fiction, but it sure as hell could be our future! Like Geek Girl said, we have PDAs and technology now that are far ahead of TOS. TOS helped us expand our imaginations to make this stuff that we now have! Do you see what I am saying? We don't need to correlate one show with another to make sense of it all. Each show has been made based on the imaginations of its creators. We, as viewers, have to expand these creations and create something entirely better to look forward to for ourselves.*****"Z0D to Enterprise. Beam me up."******
July 11, 2001, 12:53 p.m. CST
We'll have to agree to disagree I'm afraid. You say: "We don't need to correlate one show with another to make sense of it all. Each show has been made based on the imaginations of its creators." The key it being successful, for me, is to believe in it. How can I believe in it when it goes against the grain of what it is intended to represent? I couldn't sit through a western where Jesse James rides a Harley to rob the train. Why should I, it's an insult to my intelligence. I KNOW what the west was like. And I KNOW what Star Trek's 23rd century was like. Like I said, today's technology doesn't matter. PDA's do not matter. We KNOW what tricorders look like in Kirk's imagined 23rd century. We KNOW what Kirk's ship looked like in the imagined 23rd century, pastel walls and all. To ask me to use my imagination to place Russell Crowe in an ancient Roman arena when he is really playing in Yankee stadium is a tall order indeed. Had producers and set designers used a little more creativity and cut their apron stings to the 24th century, we wouldn't need to use our imagination at all. Imagine that! :)
July 11, 2001, 5:42 p.m. CST
killed his own continuity, as soon as the technology allowed him, when he started the TOS movies. No more 60's look, ticker-tape readouts replaced by walls of CRT's, even those bumpy-headed weird-nosed Klingons, but nobody complains about that. That DS9 episode, though, makes it hard to just dismiss the 60's production values like we've been doing since TMP...
July 11, 2001, 6:30 p.m. CST
No, not Superman, ARCTURUS! Just because we have the technology to make the 22nd century look more realistic than a bunch of thimbles and vacuum tubes does not mean we have to go that route. What wrong with the old-school look? NOTHING! I repeat, NOTHING! Most of you out their just do not get why we're upset that the Enterprise sets look way to much like the bastard child of DS9, Voyager and the Defiant. It's all about preserving continuity, people! Even though continuity has been violated continually in the Trek universe, this does not excuse further violations. I would LOVE, I repeat, LOVE to see a Trek series set befor TOS with the old fashioned sets from the 60's! It can be done, despite you naysayers.
July 11, 2001, 6:57 p.m. CST
All this talk of vacuum tubes, thimbles and violations is getting kind of racy. I hope Mrs. Harm ate her Wheaties this mornin' Yeehaw!!
July 11, 2001, 9:55 p.m. CST
ComputerGuy68, the 'NX' in the ships registry doesn't refer to its class. In Trek lore, Starfleet starships bear the NCC designation, and experimental Starships have NX. The Defiant was never an official Starfleet ship and carried the NX designation. The Excelsior had the NX designation in Star Trek 3 and 4 as it was still in its testing phase. It was converted to NCC-2000 in Star Trek 6. This seems to imply that Enterprise's NX-01 Enterprise is supposedly the first ever starship. *sigh*
July 12, 2001, 4:36 a.m. CST
"Truth be told they HATE you because while everyone else is praising them - you are whining about some inconsistancy you found based on an event that took place in an obscure episode of a show that was canceled over 30 years ago!" Correction Soylent Green-we're whining about an inconsistancy found based on the entire three seasons of a ground breaking classic television science fiction series called "Star Trek", that was canceled over 30 years ago." Hardly obscure! ps. Soylent Green is people..
July 12, 2001, 7:49 a.m. CST
At least they've got the command colors right for that era. Bakula's wearing yellow, imagine the uproar if he had been wearing red? The fanboys wouldnt have liked that
July 12, 2001, 12:29 p.m. CST
They look more primitive than the original series MOVIES certainly, and that's a relief. I admit, it'll be hard as hell to make things look primitive when compaired to the production values of a '60's TV series, but at least these sets look like they came way way before the Enterprise from The Motion Picture so that's to their credit. And I'm glad they gave the set some color, I was really sick of that sterile gray look on Voyager.********To Soylent Green, thank you for playing Devil's Advocate. I think most die-hard Trek fans are well aware of the producers' desire to make money. And I do believe that they think the fans who actually expect something out of them are in the minority. But you think continuity doesn't make money? Um, well no, good TV does, but tossing out continuity means bad TV with pretty special effects which makes less money than good TV with pretty special effects. Earth: Final Conflict is unwatchable for all the continiuty switching they did. The majority of Voyager was disjointed shite--though it did have the occasional nice stand alone episode every now and then. These current Trek "writers" can't be bothered to keep continuity in the same sereis! But forgetting the original series limits Enterprise because many people will hate it for doing so. Why do that? Can't you please everyone? If the average viewer thinks it looks cool, and the faithful Trek fans think its good, then HOW DO YOU **NOT** MAKE MONEY?!!! Remembering the original series is only a limitation if you have talentless shit heads for writers who can't tell good stories given the restraints that the original creators had in mind. Roddenberry's perfect people? DS9 found a good way around that, and twist my soul the description of Enterprise sounds like it might have gotten by this problem too. We'll see. But inventing time distortion villains? Ignoring the smooth headed Klingon thing?(note, you don't have to NOT have bumpy headed Klingons, just explain how they got smooth heads for a while, then turned bumpy again! A virus, an alien mutation, this is NOT hard!) So far the design of this new Enterprise looks hit or miss. It really depends on how the writing fairs. The sets of DS9 and Babylon 5 looked bad at first too, but the shows were great and made them work.
July 12, 2001, 12:46 p.m. CST
Ha ha, I love that line... but seriously, I don't know what to think of this new show. I just have a gut feeling that it is not going to be very good... Call it a hunch, based on that last shining example of greatness, Voyager...