|
Someone else told me it was because the homeworld was all harsh and there was gas or dust or something everywhere.
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 00:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 13:04 |
|
|
Some Other Guy posted:Someone else told me it was because the homeworld was all harsh and there was gas or dust or something everywhere. That shouldn't happen til after Star Trek VI. Edit: 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 01:16
|
|
|
MisterFusion posted:A new trailer has a quick shot of a Klingon without the helmet: http://i.imgur.com/OUkXk52.jpg I dig the nod towards ST1 style klingons versus the constant reusage of ST3 style klingons.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 05:46
|
|
|
Some Other Guy posted:Why are they wearing masks again? Was it just to be dramatic about revealing what JJTrek Klingons look like? It's probably so they can have a number onscreen at once without having to do the makeup job for each.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 09:12
|
|
|
They could just CGI infinite versions of one actor like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
I don't recall seeing anyone post this, but this link has a great new poster for the IMAX screenings that gives a good look at the Antiprise from the trailer. http://www.hitfix.com/news/new-star-trek-into-darkness-imax-poster-reveals-john-harrisons-ship
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 01:25
|
|
|
jeeves posted:I dig the nod towards ST1 style klingons versus the constant reusage of ST3 style klingons. Did we even see klingons in ST1? Or are you referring to TOS klingons? Also it was said in the movie posters thread, but the scaling on that poster looks really off.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
Kingtheninja posted:Did we even see klingons in ST1? Or are you referring to TOS klingons? Also it was said in the movie posters thread, but the scaling on that poster looks really off. Yes the very first scene of TMP was of Klingon's and their ridges.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
Kingtheninja posted:Did we even see klingons in ST1? Or are you referring to TOS klingons? Also it was said in the movie posters thread, but the scaling on that poster looks really off. The foreheads are straight outta ST1. Speaking of Klingons, I was like 10 when Sternbach and Oduka released their awesome "Next Generation Technical manual" so the new Bird of Prey Haynes Manual by Sternbach is pretty kickin rad. They even acknowledge the huge size differences of BOP by saying "Klingons just really like the design-- so they just scale the blue prints up!"
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:46
|
|
|
Great Bird of the Galaxy! That ship is massive!
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 06:30
|
|
|
Retardog posted:I don't recall seeing anyone post this, but this link has a great new poster for the IMAX screenings that gives a good look at the Antiprise from the trailer. Thats so retarded. Your ship can only carry 1,000 families in comfort for long distances!? Mine can cary 10,000 families in comfort!! Haha take that.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 06:49
|
|
|
Wank posted:Thats so retarded. Your ship can only carry 1,000 families in comfort for long distances!? Mine can cary 10,000 families in comfort!! Haha take that. What's even more funny is if you take into consideration the retarded original sizing for the new Enterprise that the cgi-nerds making the new movie pulled out of their rear end. It was like 2x as long as the Galaxy class or some poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 06:55
|
|
|
jeeves posted:What's even more funny is if you take into consideration the retarded original sizing for the new Enterprise that the cgi-nerds making the new movie pulled out of their rear end. Most people would accept that as a VFX goof and let it go. But not Trekkies. That's like going back and rationalizing this mistake from TNG:  By saying, "Well they must have a backup phaser emitter in there." Then drawing up detailed charts for it down to the power junctures and getting upset that it wouldn't fit. Although, there are various rants online about the Captain's Yacht on the Enterprise-E not really fitting, so that might have already happened. Poster's just for dramatic effect. You can see from the trailers that the Vengeance is only about twice the size of the NuPrise.  EDIT: I'm not gonna pretend that this stuff doesn't nag at me a little as a fairly diehard Trekkie. I just don't think it's worth all of this. Great_Gerbil fucked around with this message at 13:58 on May 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 13:47
|
|
|
Why is his ship so drat big? That alone is going to make me want to watch this movie to see if they screwed up this time or if the JJ Abrams magic continues. It likely will, but we will see.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
quote:When Kirk visits the building site, we can see workers close to the hull of the ship, one just in front of the nacelle and one on a bridge a couple of meters below the saucer. The saucer measures 669 pixels from the center to the lower edge. The height of the tiny human figure near the saucer is 18 pixels. Assuming that the worker measures 1.8m, this would give the saucer a radius of just 67m, which is an almost perfect match with the saucer of the TMP Enterprise! Again, this can't be a coincidence. The figure in front of the nacelle measures some 15 pixels, while the nacelle, at the same distance from the "camera", is 194 pixels high from the upper end of the pylon to the very top. The overall length of the ship would be barely 300m based on this comparison, but we would have needed to account for some parallax, so the ship may be actually somewhat longer, perhaps 366m as designed. -- In contrast, the teaser trailer of January 2008 shows workers on the nacelle, between the two fins at the aft end. The distance between the roots of the fins would be as much as 18m based on the visual evidence, and this gives us a ship of well over 600m length. It is obvious once again that the scale is not consistent, but the canon movie scene should overrule the teaser trailer, although the latter may have been made with the new "official" larger scale of the ship. What. The. gently caress. 
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 16:43
|
|
|
der juicen posted:What. The. gently caress. On the other hand, Star Dreadnoughts.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
der juicen posted:What. The. gently caress. This article about the differences between the refit Enterprise and the TOS model is probably my favorite. That alone should invalidate almost all of the groaning about inconsistencies but, for some reason, it continues. EDIT 2: Accidentally IMG leached.  EDIT: Also, "There is no canon evidence in any episode, but according to the Star Trek Encyclopedia the original starship Enterprise NCC-1701 was launched in 2245 (discounting the admiral's faulty claim in "Star Trek III" that the ship was just 20 years old in 2284, which can't be true)" Great_Gerbil fucked around with this message at 17:39 on May 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 17:28
|
|
|
der juicen posted:What. The. gently caress. I sometimes wonder if you had people in the 1920s sperging out about John Carter and the like.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
Great_Gerbil posted:This article about the differences between the refit Enterprise and the TOS model is probably my favorite. That alone should invalidate almost all of the groaning about inconsistencies but, for some reason, it continues.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
Bernd Schneider makes us all look like scrub fans.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
der juicen posted:What. The. gently caress. I don't know why people in the Star Trek thread are making fun of people who do things like this. It's cool that people can have a thing they love and appreciate at this level.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
Pioneer42 posted:I don't know why people in the Star Trek thread are making fun of people who do things like this. It's cool that people can have a thing they love and appreciate at this level. Would you really say Schneider is enjoying Star Trek? I can love and appreciate Star Trek without delving into minutia that doesn't contribute or detract from the story at all. It's great that people are passionate about these shows, I love reading what they write. On the other hand, have you ever read the TrekBBS? Fans have divided themselves into factions that argue over this sort of thing ad nauseum. They legitimately hate people who are fans of different series or movies and have completely put aside suspension of disbelief. For me, personally, I'm not going to let the size of the Enterprise or the location of the phaser banks (that changed weekly in the original series) ruin the experience. That's what people like Schneider are doing.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
Pioneer42 posted:I don't know why people in the Star Trek thread are making fun of people who do things like this. It's cool that people can have a thing they love and appreciate at this level. He's not loving anything. He's like the stardestroyer.net guy who bases what makes good sci fi on which series has the most powerful weapons and then uses a load of lovely math to say "hey, it's star wars". It's awful nerd stag fighting. Their field of battle is who can spot the biggest inconsistency and then whine the loudest.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
It's essentially the same as the 'Wookiepedia' complex that completely misinterprets what makes the thing compelling or iconic in the first place.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
When you guys started linking to spergy rear end quotes, I knew without even mousing over the links that it would be from Ex-Astris-Scientia. I love how that has been one of the fountains of sperginesses for all of nerdom on the internet since the mid-90s.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 20:00
|
|
|
Pioneer42 posted:I don't know why people in the Star Trek thread are making fun of people who do things like this. It's cool that people can have a thing they love and appreciate at this level. I really like Bernd, but he has been lost to the void of TrekBBS and the endless sperg for a long time. Dude writes some awesome articles analyzing Trek and the places it gets things wrong (and right). His episode reviews are really interesting, if awfully formatted. He went off the goddamned deep end when JJTrek came out and hasn't come back to the light.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
Great_Gerbil posted:Would you really say Schneider is enjoying Star Trek? [...] That's what people like Schneider are doing. Regarde Aduck posted:He's not loving anything. He's like the stardestroyer.net guy Gau posted:I really like Bernd, but he has been lost to the void I have no idea who Schneider or Bernd is or that site other than the previously-linked articles concerning ship designs and comparisons which I thought were interesting, so they may be actually be a terrible and intolerable persons--I don't know. But I loved pouring over the Star Trek Encyclopedia and the TNG Technical Manual when I was a child, and as cliche as this sounds, it was my fascination and enjoyment of these technical aspects of Star Trek that guided me to my choice of career. And it didn't detract at all from my enjoyment of the themes and characters and plots; but rather it complemented them. So to me I don't think it's fair to say that all people who enjoy the little details and "lore" are insufferable nerds and that the only true way to love and enjoy Star Trek is to disregard details; enjoy plot or vice-versa. Some of us can enjoy both.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
Pioneer42 posted:I have no idea who Schneider or Bernd is or that site other than the previously-linked articles concerning ship designs and comparisons which I thought were interesting, so they may be actually be a terrible and intolerable persons--I don't know. Oh, believe me. I pored over that stuff, too. I still look at them from time to time. The Chronology was amazing. I read the Nitpicker's Guides with extreme curiosity. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that they're just super-nerds. But it does deteriorate the brand and kills franchises when the fans become like this. Enterprise, for instance, limped along for awhile but started to show its true promise in Season 4 but was killed. Partly because Les Moonves hated Star Trek. But, mostly because the fans turned on it and refused to enjoy it for what it was. I understand the disappointment with parts of Voyager, Enterprise, etc. What I'll never understand is the absolute vitriol spewed toward them in the name of "continuity" and "the franchise." ED: Especially when some of that "continuity" is really flimsy. Some of Enterprise's worst sins seem to be implied, not explicit. Great_Gerbil fucked around with this message at 20:43 on May 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
Pioneer42 posted:So to me I don't think it's fair to say that all people who enjoy the little details and "lore" are insufferable nerds and that the only true way to love and enjoy Star Trek is to disregard details; enjoy plot or vice-versa. Some of us can enjoy both. You're not paying attention to the conversation we're having then. No one is saying "people who love these details are the worst". We're talking about people who obsess about this stuff and actually are pretty much assholes to people who feel differently from them. They are people who let a scale discrepancy ruin a whole movie for them. That's the kind of person we are talking about.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/3/4297596/star-trek-aims-for-global-profit Why Star Trek is whiter than ever, I guess
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
Just saw the movie at a private pre-screening. It's god damned amazing!
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
I don't hate Trek nerds, I was a huge Trek nerd in middle school. I went through many a TOS novel that the school library had for "Accelerated Reading" because they were fun, interesting, and easy. I do hate when Trek nerds become insufferable because " ".
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 22:28
|
|
|
JJTrek 2: Deus ex sanguine
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 23:06
|
|
|
api call girl posted:On the other hand, Star Dreadnoughts. Did somebody say Dreadnoughts? 
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 23:22
|
|
|
Fuzzyjello posted:Why is his ship so drat big? That alone is going to make me want to watch this movie to see if they screwed up this time or if the JJ Abrams magic continues. It likely will, but we will see. It's a warship belonging to the head of Starfleet. It's just for war and designed for being operated by a skeleton crew.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 23:32
|
|
|
FoxHimself posted:It's a warship belonging to the head of Fixed
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 23:37
|
|
|
Please tell me 3D in theaters is much better than using blue/red paper glasses for that 3D youtube trailer. Those paper glasses are awful. This is my first 3D movie.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2013 00:49
|
|
|
Siroc posted:Please tell me 3D in theaters is much better than using blue/red paper glasses for that 3D youtube trailer. Those paper glasses are awful. This is my first 3D movie. Theatre 3D is much better than red/blue.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
Siroc posted:Please tell me 3D in theaters is much better than using blue/red paper glasses for that 3D youtube trailer. Those paper glasses are awful. This is my first 3D movie. It's more like grey and a darker shade of grey.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2013 01:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 13:04 |
|
|
computer parts posted:It's more like grey and a darker shade of grey. Only if the theater you see it at is lovely and doesn't have their brightness up high enough. A properly bright 3D presentation is fine. ApexAftermath fucked around with this message at 03:57 on May 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2013 02:28
|
|