www.ditl.org

...man, Bernd is really ignoring canon when he says the new Connie is 302-366 meters when its clearly larger from what the scaling had.

I mean, look at this:

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/artic ... t.htm#size

Bernd appears to be in denial over the new movie. Hell, he flat out admits that everything points towards it being pretty fucking big. He's not using the evidence to reach a conclusion, he's already got his conclusion and is simply declaring anything that suggests otherwise to be an FX error.

Now that I think of it, wasn't Bernd the one with the "In Memory" avatar of the original E?

Sionnach Glic wrote:Now that I think of it, wasn't Bernd the one with the "In Memory" avatar of the original E?

Yep.

However, at least one of the admins at SCN is sufficiently pissed off by his attitude that he came up with this label for their Trek XI forum:

SCN Admin wrote:Star Trek XI: Discuss how JJ Abrams raped your childhood, and randomly declare things non-canon.

Well, Bernd's grip on reality has only been so so since XI came out.

Huh.........talk about a life changing event.

Captain Seafort wrote:Star Trek XI: Discuss how JJ Abrams raped your childhood, and randomly declare things non-canon.

That's fucking brilliant.

I just find it amusing that someone who obviously spends so much time trying to ferret out the "truth" about things in the show suddenly throws it all out for the mental equivalent of jamming his fingers in his ears and shouting, "I can't hear you!" at the top of his lungs. The visual evidence, the FX guys, and even the director all say the ship is about ~725 meters. His only defense for a 300m ship, "That's the way I think it should be." Even for a fanboy that's pitiful.

On the plus side, that guy with the 3KM long GCS page is now a prophet.

Whilst I have the greatest possible respect for Brendt, to an extent he's always been this way. If you actually read through his stuff, a LOT of times he will dismiss visual evidence and official sources in favour of what is "logical" to his way of thinking. He tends not to like designs and capabilities that are radically different to other existing stuff, to the point where he will "rationalise" them to fit.

Which is fair enough, I'm of the opinion that Trek is a broad church with room enough for many viewpoints and opinions. But this big Enterprise does seem to have crystallised opinion pretty sharply for some reason.

Me, the thing I find oddest is that he looks at the massive interiors that would never fit inside a small Enterprise and just kinda dismisses them for... well no particular reason that I can see.

GrahamKennedy wrote:Whilst I have the greatest possible respect for Brendt, to an extent he's always been this way. If you actually read through his stuff, a LOT of times he will dismiss visual evidence and official sources in favour of what is "logical" to his way of thinking. He tends not to like designs and capabilities that are radically different to other existing stuff, to the point where he will "rationalise" them to fit.

I have to say, I'm sympathetic to that approach - many years ago I decided that the only way I could really care about the ST universe (with all of its inconsistencies and absurdities) was to make up my own personal "canon" as I saw fit, where I was free to retcon things or reimagine things to make more sense. I think the difference is that Bernd still invests himself in the concept of canon, and fights in vain to find a canonical justification for his favored ideas; I just reject canon as a useful concept (I'd suggest something like "flexible continuity" as a more viable substitute), so I have no interest in making a Charge of the Light Brigade against the new huge Enterprise. For me, the JJverse is a discrete fictional extension of ST that I don't have much personal concern for, beyond the fact that it's entertaining.

GrahamKennedy wrote:Which is fair enough, I'm of the opinion that Trek is a broad church with room enough for many viewpoints and opinions. But this big Enterprise does seem to have crystallised opinion pretty sharply for some reason.

I think it's partially because people are used to "alternate universes" being defined purely by the characters, with the ships and technology being identical, and partially because the idea of the TOS Federation building a ship bigger than a GCS is idiotic. Unfortunately a lot of people take the latter approach and conclude that the neoE is small, rather than the more likely answer that there were already massive differences between the Abramsverse and the Geneverse even before the Narada showed up.

Me, the thing I find oddest is that he looks at the massive interiors that would never fit inside a small Enterprise and just kinda dismisses them for... well no particular reason that I can see.

Simple - because the neoE is small, and therefore engineering, the shuttlebay, the bridge, the people on the nacelles in the trailer, and pretty much every external shot we ever see of it must be VFX errors.

The two sellers for me were the shuttle bay shots and the pull out from the bridge. With the way the shuttles were arranged in it anything under 600 meters was ruled out entirely. The bridge pull out was another killer for anything remotely old Big-E sized. On the original Big-E the hump on the saucer was completely filled with the bridge. On the Neo-E the bridge is just a small part of the lower front of the dome. Those are several VFX shots that CANNOT be reconciled with a small Enterprise, period.

Good point, Tyyr. Adding to that is the fact that the neoE's bridge (which, as you say, took up less of the bridge dome) appeared to be considerably larger than the old-school E's bridge.

If the only thing odd were one shuttle bay shot or just the bridge shot and everything else jived with a 300m Enterprise including the VFX guys and director's statements then you're golden and you can claim the one shot was in error. The problem is that every single VFX shot supports a 725m Enterprise along all the principal's statements in regards to its size. The only thing Bernd is basing his 300m Enterprise on is that he just doesn't like a 725m one. At this point he's gone from logical rationalization with a bit of personal bias (how most of the nonsensical crap is figured out in this genre) to just being an idiot.

Might be worthwhile to tally all the for and against arguments.

For a big ship :

1) The shuttlebay landing shot.
2) The bridge window.
3) The engineering area. That place is HUGE. It wouldn't fit in a small ship.
4) The people who made the movie say it's big.
6) The view of the ship on the surface, compared to things around it.
5) The shots from the teaser trailer show it as very large, especially the top of the nacelle shot.

Against that there's :

1) The launch of the pod, I am told, supports a smaller ship. But I am not so sure; need to look at it closely.
2) Pike's shuttle launch.

Any other arguments?