Early 1701 Enterprise Test

[jimman10000]

nice

[johnhi00]

Nice Test. You got the "weathering" on the ship as well. Very nice.

[FantasticBob7000]

Very impressive.

[MrImastinker]

TNG was the best.

[Xextreem]

Everyone miss the point (its about this vid) not the whining shit about star trek his self. Good test keep it up:) love to see more if there is a more afther 3 years lol.

[Curas1]

this is sweet what was with that new movie garbage!

[joness105639]

I would only make a few alterations to make it fit better with the cannon.

In "the cage" the rear of the nacells had louvers instead of a globe. this version is seen occasionally in season 1 because of reuse of stock footage. I think that the early version of the enterprise should have something even more primitive in design for the rear of the nacells then is shown here.

[spacecowboy5000]

What is "cannon" in your view? When Roddenberry was handed the first model of the Enterprise he held it upside down and said, "It looks great!" The version used in STXI differs only in the details and looks pretty much like all the older Enterprises. Cannon was falsely created by us fans. Still, I think this is a beautiful version that should have been used in the remastered version of TOS. Live long and blah-blah-blah...

[joness105639]

"Cannon was falsely created by us fans."

LOL you havent been paying attention. Cannon was created by roddenbury himself. During his lifetime he said what was legit. He worked hard to make sure that everything made sense together. Even after he was no longer executive producer all the writers and directors consulted him for advice.

[joness105639]

"The version used in STXI differs only in the details"

Yeah well star trek and indianna jones also differ only in the details so what's your point? You know if we ignore all the details then there is no difference between any two details and we may as well remake star trek into "guiding light" and use props, models and set design from "space balls" to tell the story of a transexxual captiain kirk. Its only different in the details really.

[spacecowboy5000]

I'm talking about one ship with a dish and three cylinders. When you get down to criticisms like "the primary hull is 3 feet to long" or "the warp nacelles are too curved" then that's really overdoing it. Roddenberry himself said, "The ship is not important. The people and the stories they tell are." Star Trek's philosophy was not about how many photon torpedoes the ship can fire per second. It about having an open mind about the universe.

[joness105639]

"Star Trek's philosophy was not about how many photon torpedoes the ship can fire per second. It about having an open mind about the universe."

If that were true, than Star Trek would be unitelligable. The ship design could change every second along with the actors the props the costumes the language. Its total chaos. Why not just take the entire "sex in the city" series and call it Star Trek? Itd be so much cheaper than payimg abrams a multimillion dollar budget.

[spacecowboy5000]

I like the way you ignored the "open mind about the universe". I thought STXI was much like flogging a dead horse. Yes, I said it; Star Trek is/was dead - now the Trekkies can burn me at the stake for my heresy. There are many myths about Trek and its creators that have been circulating for decades. One of them is about cannon. When I tried to submit a Trek manuscript for publication in 1989, I was given a 3 page guideline and told to try and "stick to it". No cannon law.

[joness105639]

"I like the way you ignored the "open mind about the universe". "

I didnt ignore it I ran with it. If you think that sex in the city shouldnt be considered a star trek series it is you who is not having an open mind about the universe sir. "No cannon law. "

Fine put barney the dinosaur at the helm of a tie fighter named "enterprise" give him a federation pizza delivery business and call it Star Trek.

[spacecowboy5000]

I don't think it's neccessary to use hyperbole. Nothing like you describe could ever happen. Star Trek is too widely loved and respected all over the world. If a scenario like you described would happen I seriously think there would be something akin to the civil war. This love and respect is what keeps it from becoming "Sex & the City" *shudders*. Trek was a dead franchise, Paramount hired a "hot" new director to revive it. Some hated the movie, some loved it. That's the bottom line.

[joness105639]

So on the one hand you reject the notion of cannon, and on the other you assert that not anything goes. I'm sorry but thats just not coherant. It can't be both. IMO paramount made a business move to make miney in hiring abrams and inso doing turned their backs on star trek as we know and love it. I am not alone on this one.  Rodger Ebert and otehr critics noticed that suddenly star trek was all action and no substance.

[spacecowboy5000]

Cannon is a big word. The Ten Commandments are cannon for a few religions. The Gospels aren't. And how Paul changed those Gospels... Well, I won't get started on the history of Christianity. Point is, something that is simply established by past writers/creators is one thing. Calling it, unchangeable, carved-in-stone cannon is another. As soon as it is it's no longer a creative process. Any work of art (yes,Trek) has to remain malleable to stay alive. And I'm out of space agan...

[joness105639]

"Any work of art (yes,Trek) has to remain malleable to stay alive."

Then by all means piss on the mona lisa to bring it "back to life"

[spacecowboy5000]

At a comnvention in 1989 I met David Arnold who worked with Roddenberry, Susan Sacket and D.C. Fontana. In a Q&A session someone brought up the issue of canon. I heard Mr. Arnold say he had heard of Star Trek canon but that none ever existed in the production of the show. Instead, there were some general guidelines that were made flexible enough to accomodate individual stories. Until Paramount says differently canon is a fan invention better known as fanon.

[joness105639]

The fact is that unless you honestly believe that anythig goes and that there is no line between what is star trek and what is not star trek, then even you believe in a canon even if you don't admit it.

[joness105639]

This isnt about paramount reviving a "dead" franchise. In a sense they cant kill star trek. We already have several; great movies and TV series, as long as people watch those it cant die.  Bermain made a mistake in the way he started "Enterprise" and alineated some fans, and then all post roddenbury films strayed further and further from canon and alienated even more. In abrams film what i see is Star Wars/Starship troopers rebranded Star Trek, and worst of all Vulcan is destroyed.

[joness105639]

Heck if you're gonna blow up vulcan and romulus, why not earth and Kronos while you're at it? Why not destroy not merely half the homeworlds of the major iconic races in TOS why not ALL of them, then we can turn Star Trek into Battlestar Galactica and get some real money.

[KaboomKrusader]

JJ set the new film in an Alternate Reality to prevent this type of whining. A lot of good it did, apparently. It's a new start, a reboot set in an alternate timeline so that fanboys have no real reason to sweat in their homemade uniforms about "canon."

The movie casted off all the lame stuffiness and pseudoscience babble and returned to TOS' fun, 'fantasy-adventure in space' feeling.

It's "to boldly go where no man has gone before," not "to only go certain places to preserve canon."

[TazG2000]

@KaboomKrusader That's why every series until Enterprise was set further into the future. Star Trek was all about expanding upon a growing universe, not rewriting it. The failure of Enterprise should have been a hint to Paramount that the fans don't want prequels.

It's silly how proponents of this movie brush of and ridicule the "fanboys", because those fanboys are supposedly the target audience, but instead of a Star Trek movie for fans, they got an action movie for "movie-goers". [cont]

[TazG2000]

@KaboomKrusader If you and the producers think Star Trek canon is lame, what was the point of making a Star Trek movie? Just make a generic sci fi action movie that "movie-goers" like you would love -- which is basically all it is, with the "Star Trek" name plastered on it to lure in an extra audience.

It's fine if you thought it was a good movie, but accepting this obvious marketing ploy as a faithful addition to the Star Trek story doesn't make any sense.

[spacecowboy5000]

@TazG2000 At a convention I heard D.C. Fontana say there never has been a "canon". If she said it well then I beleive it. Yes, there are guidelines, suggestions, all kinds of things to help writers. But there is no canon. The only canon that exists was created by fans and was not accepted by Roddenberry or Paramount. Get it? And while not add the movie to the growing pile of Star Trek crap that's pilling up as canon? All Trek shows are all that's real. Period.

[TazG2000]

@spacecowboy5000

You're arguing petty semantics and I don't see what your point is. My point did not revolve around the word "canon". If it helps you understand, replace my usage of the word "canon" with "everything Star Trek was up until this point".

[spacecowboy5000]

@TazG2000 Sorry I misunderstood. I should have paid more attention. I'll admit I actually enjoyed the new movie but at the same time I had a lot of issues with it. Roddenberry encouraged changed and experimentation but this went far beyond that. There should have been SOME continuity from the original universe. At least to make the transition more beleivable. It all comes down to one big mistake; JJ Abrams. He's creative but he likes changing everything. Should have been someone conservative.

[rhyanwood1]

@spacecowboy5000 D.C. Fontana is not the voice of Trek. She has zero authority to say anything regarding canon.

[spacecowboy5000]

@rhyanwood1 Sorry, I never said she had authority. I said that she repeated what others like Roddenberry and Susan Sackett had said about any notion of canon killing original creativity and keeping the Trek universe in a static state - never evolving, never changing. Roddenberry himself at some point said that canon was invented by fans to keep up with all that was going on. If the Great Bird said it that's good enough for me. :)

[sim5191]

but this one isn't bad. infact i give 4/5

[sim5191]

the star trek XI enterprise-A is a bit ugly.

the deflector dish looks like a sattelite dish for receving signals.

[jmm1233]

nice model ,

[ThePhantom359]

I think the Enterprise, in the new movie, is absolutly ugly (both the exterior and interior). Look at the bridge!  It looks soo goofy!

[joness105639]

not to mention that the interior of the romulan ship make sno sense at all, or that engineering looks unfinished.

[blackops555]

*sigh* what should have been...

[bluefury1984]

This is it. This is the one that should be in the new movie

[FarginBastiges]

Agreed.

[joness105639]

Aggreed

[jtkirkfan2002]

@bluefury1984 I was really looking forward to seeing the original ship detailed enough for the big screen. While I liked the movie, it was a disappointment to see the Abrams version.

[argebarse]

@jtkirkfan2002 I thought the new Enterprise looked fine while in motion but kind of weird when standing still

[Craspic]

Nice. I think the music sounds vaguely Copland-esque.

[stevemem]

Very Impresive

[frizt0]

Wonderfull

[rurbert]

This is it people...a cross between the tv version and the movie version...not bad.

[amit790]

The music kinda reminds me of Deep Space Nine

[gremmpaltakin]

ugh ds9...the first in a series of...bad series

[jamesdavis86]

DS9 was not a bad series. It was actually one of the best Star Trek series.

[gremmpaltakin]

No you are incorrect. It was bad. So there.

[Asianmoca]

true... it should the the battles that the federation had to undertake.. more adult then the others where characters dont always die....

[plastique45]

@jamesdavis86 Are you out of your fucking mind? It's so bad it laughable!

[ocerg1111]

@jamesdavis86 ew I hated it. It felt like what star trek becomes when roddenberry dies.

[thefinalfrontier1701]

@jamesdavis86 I know DS9 is good, I'm just having a hard time accepting a space station setting.

[Wharding85]

the music reminds me more of the music for the starfleet academy game, and DS9 wasnt that bad, it was still watchable, got a lot better in season 3

[heavyarms01h]

Where did the music come from? The cue sounds like the soundtrack from the Star Trek: Starfleet Academy game theme.

[terminattheconqueror]

I like this variant. Even though no one can ever change the original ship, this is way better than the completely modified version. The other version seemed...deadly. This one seems more realistic.

[kumquat28]

i love the nerds arguing whether its a confederation class or constitution......oh by the way its a constitution class :P

[Spectual1]

Interesting stealing the ideas of the Confederation Class. First federation class ship to have shielding capabilities.

[NCC1701J]

Its is not a Confederation-class starship, it is a Constitution-class. There is no such thing as a Confederation-class.

[dbaylis1150]

How can you be so sure if the created the first force field in 2152?

[BuzzyFredrick]

I dont know,but I think it resembles a constipation class ship.

[Firefox13A]

Beautiful! Excellent model.

[commanderhamster]

Fantastic

Arent they using the gabe koerner enterprise though???

[thatdood001]

I certainly hope not...the Gabe Koerner abomination should have never seen the light of day.

[EliteRanger]

LOL!! I agree whole-heartedly.

[Actionguy1]

Gabe Koerner's Enterprise is simply a "speculative" design based on the original Constitution Class design.

It WILL NOT be the Enterprise seen in "Star Trek XI".

[Airportchris2]

From the teaser trailer, it seems like thats wats gonna be used, if not close to it.

[Actionguy1]

Paramount has given J.J. Abrams quite a bit of leeway as far as 'artistic license. But , Abrams has stated that the studio has forbidden him to screw around exterior of the Enterprise too much.

[Airportchris2]

well, the teasor shows a somewhat different design.

[terminattheconqueror]

i hope not lol

[themanthebelly]

Excellent work. That is how I want the Enterprise to look in Star Trek XI.

[buckaroohawk]

That model is absolutely beautiful. I wish there was a MAX version of it out there somewhere. Great work on this video. Let's see more!

[eminydax]

awesome