If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   Las Vegas nearly had a life-sized Starship Enterprise. It's as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in despair and were suddenly silenced   (io9.com) divider line 106
    More: Sad, Starship Enterprise, Enterprise, Downtown City Fathers, Eiffel Tower  
•       •       •

7521 clicks; posted to Geek » on 07 Apr 2012 at 10:44 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



106 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-07 09:12:55 PM
Wasn't pretty enough and God let it die.
 
2012-04-07 09:26:55 PM
The guy who said "no" really didn't get it.

There's no way that a lifesized Enterprise would have flopped. Even today, when Trek is at its lowest point, you'd still have Trekkies visiting the damned thing like it's a shrine.
 
2012-04-07 09:39:45 PM

FirstNationalBastard: The guy who said "no" really didn't get it.

There's no way that a lifesized Enterprise would have flopped. Even today, when Trek is at its lowest point, you'd still have Trekkies visiting the damned thing like it's a shrine.


Trek was at it's lowest point after Nemesis, not now.
 
2012-04-07 09:45:46 PM
I want a life sized Borg cube, with lots of cubby holes to stand in, dammit!
 
2012-04-07 09:48:12 PM

Weaver95: I want a life sized Borg cube, with lots of cubby holes to stand in, dammit!


Yeah, but within 10 years, there would be a Borg Queen ruling the thing, and some middle aged broad with a two pack a day habit would blow the damn thing up every other week.
 
2012-04-07 09:48:18 PM

FirstNationalBastard: The guy who said "no" really didn't get it.

There's no way that a lifesized Enterprise would have flopped. Even today, when Trek is at its lowest point, you'd still have Trekkies visiting the damned thing like it's a shrine.


I dunno. Star Trek: The Experience wasn't able to stay profitable, and it was far cheaper to create and maintain than this would have been.
 
2012-04-07 10:21:16 PM

elchip: FirstNationalBastard: The guy who said "no" really didn't get it.

There's no way that a lifesized Enterprise would have flopped. Even today, when Trek is at its lowest point, you'd still have Trekkies visiting the damned thing like it's a shrine.

I dunno. Star Trek: The Experience wasn't able to stay profitable, and it was far cheaper to create and maintain than this would have been.


Yep. I went to that, it was.......okay......
 
2012-04-07 10:25:55 PM
I don't see how a life sized Enterprise could exist in a gravity situation without the saucer and probably the nacelles falling off.

GAT_00: Trek was at it's lowest point after Nemesis, not now.


Yeah Nemesis flopped big time. Partially because it sucked but it didn't help that someone thought it was a good idea to release it smack in between those indie films Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter. The new Trek movie revived the franchise.
 
2012-04-07 10:44:21 PM
I like the Star Wars quote reference in the Star Trek headline. It might be too subtle of a troll, but I like it.
 
2012-04-07 10:50:39 PM
Would there really have been enough people over time continuously going to it to make worth the money?
 
2012-04-07 10:56:02 PM
You don't need to the exterior Enterprise shaped. Just have the interior Enterprise like, with a 10 forward bar and suites and rooms with curved viewing panels of HDTV that show star fields, planets, etc.

The Exit to Vegas would be through the Holodeck.
 
2012-04-07 10:56:20 PM

Mugato: I don't see how a life sized Enterprise could exist in a gravity situation without the saucer and probably the nacelles falling off.


I'm guessing support columns.

I actually think that was the dumbest part of the reboot, constructing something that size inside a gravity well. WTF.
 
2012-04-07 10:58:33 PM

Mugato: I don't see how a life sized Enterprise could exist in a gravity situation without the saucer and probably the nacelles falling off.

GAT_00: Trek was at it's lowest point after Nemesis, not now.

Yeah Nemesis flopped big time. Partially because it sucked but it didn't help that someone thought it was a good idea to release it smack in between those indie films Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter. The new Trek movie revived the franchise.


I'd like to nominate the void prior to the release announcement of the production of the first movie for the lowest point... 1977 or so.
 
2012-04-07 10:59:17 PM

GAT_00: I actually think that was the dumbest part of the reboot, constructing something that size inside a gravity well. WTF.


In Iowa no less.

The dumbest part for me was Kirk jumping from cadet to captain.
 
2012-04-07 11:00:06 PM

Mugato: I don't see how a life sized Enterprise could exist in a gravity situation without the saucer and probably the nacelles falling off.


The full article they linked to said it would have had supports, which would have been gussied up to make it look like it was in dry dock.
 
2012-04-07 11:00:52 PM

Mugato: The dumbest part for me was Kirk jumping from cadet to captain.


Yeah, I don't know why that irked me so, but it did.
 
2012-04-07 11:01:15 PM

Mugato: The new Trek movie revived the franchise


I'd argue that it revived the brand, by establishing an entirely new franchise that uses iconography from the original. Essentially, they made the movie accessible and profitable by jettisoning pretty much all the themes that defined Star Trek and keeping all the branding elements that sold Star Trek.

Savvy business, I suppose.
 
2012-04-07 11:06:50 PM

Mugato: GAT_00: I actually think that was the dumbest part of the reboot, constructing something that size inside a gravity well. WTF.

In Iowa no less.

The dumbest part for me was Kirk jumping from cadet to captain.


I can actually justify that a bit. One, almost the entire class he was in just got wiped the fark out. Two, the few ship's staff that weren't trainees - Pike, Medical - got injured or killed. So we have a fully functional ship, no available personnel, and a guy who rocketed to the top of his class.

It's a stretch, but it isn't quite as dumb as it could be
 
2012-04-07 11:07:33 PM

t3knomanser: Mugato: The new Trek movie revived the franchise

I'd argue that it revived the brand, by establishing an entirely new franchise that uses iconography from the original. Essentially, they made the movie accessible and profitable by jettisoning pretty much all the themes that defined Star Trek and keeping all the branding elements that sold Star Trek.

Savvy business, I suppose.


Yep.

It was a horrible generic sci-fi movie that could have been released by Siffy, and not a thing would have needed to be changed. Paramount shoehorned the names Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Enterprise into it to make more money.

But it was as much Star Trek as the new Three Stooges movie is the Three Stooges.
 
2012-04-07 11:10:13 PM

elchip:
I dunno. Star Trek: The Experience wasn't able to stay profitable, and it was far cheaper to create and maintain than this would have been.


That's because it sucked. It had about as much in common with Star Trek as the MGM Grand down the road did. They blew a golden opportunity to make the entire casino into another world and instead they just partitioned off part of it into a museum and called their bar "Quark's". You build a hotel that looks like the Enterprise, where all of the rooms look like ship staterooms, and include all of the elements from the show and that place would rock.
 
2012-04-07 11:10:36 PM
why would you need a life sized enterprise? i imagine most of the ship would be like an office building/dormitory. -- just bland living space and offices.

and miles and miles of jeffries tubes.

but engineering would be cool. and the bridge of course.
 
2012-04-07 11:18:46 PM

FirstNationalBastard: t3knomanser: Mugato: The new Trek movie revived the franchise

I'd argue that it revived the brand, by establishing an entirely new franchise that uses iconography from the original. Essentially, they made the movie accessible and profitable by jettisoning pretty much all the themes that defined Star Trek and keeping all the branding elements that sold Star Trek.

Savvy business, I suppose.

Yep.

It was a horrible generic sci-fi movie that could have been released by Siffy, and not a thing would have needed to be changed. Paramount shoehorned the names Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Enterprise into it to make more money.

But it was as much Star Trek as the new Three Stooges movie is the Three Stooges.


Or you can say Star Trek in name only.
 
2012-04-07 11:21:07 PM

Freschel: Or you can say Star Trek in name only.


Unlike Godzilla in Name Only, at least the new Star Trek hangs together as a film. It has a plot, people do things for actual reasons, and it more-or-less makes a stupid kind of sense.
 
2012-04-07 11:21:08 PM
The Paramount exec's reasoning tells you everything you need to know about the psychology of studio heads and why they lack the balls to greenlight original movie projects.

As far as building the thing full scale, well, there would have been some difficulties cantilevering the structure. It would have been expensive to do right, and maintenance would have been a constant issue. Keeping the outside looking good in the harsh sunlight and heat would have been a continuing cost, as well as the air conditioning. You'd also have a lot of inaccessible "dead space" in the pylons and nacelles, and would have to make some compromises for ADA rules and etc. I wouldn't have killed it for the reasons the Paramount exec had, but I'd have had to be really convinced by the architects and engineers about the costs vs. ROI.

I never got to experience the Quarks bar and stuff before they shut it down, but to me, that kind of construction made more sense since all that viewers experience of the Enterprise is really just interior spaces. The interior topology is way more important. Seeing it reproduced in exterior form is cool and all, but not entirely necessary to the overall experience. I mean, if it was a real starship you'd only get that view in space while in a space suit.

I think it would be more practical and much less complex to build a circular hotel/ride tower with a rectangular annex building, where the interiors could combine a BIG recreation of several saucer section decks to "play" in/tour, PLUS convention space and regular "mundane" hotel rooms. For a bonus, a couple of more "decks" in the tower could be fit out in TOS furnishings and decor and used as hotel rooms too. This way, you have the best of both. You'd of course have the voice-command turbo-lift elevators too, and gift shops so you could dress up. Since the tower has lots of floor space, you could even have a TNG bridge and saucer deck/ten forward, AND a TOS one as well. You'd have room to put the bridge decks on 3-axis motion platforms and shake things up during simulated battles. All kinds of stuff is possible with just mundane architecture, that would not be as easy if you built the actual ship form.
 
2012-04-07 11:22:20 PM
The TMP version of the Enterprise is by far the best designed and that's what this was going to be. Damn shame. Everybody on board but the CEO and his reason boils down to fear of personal embarrassment. Not even that, fear of RISK of personal embarrassment. This was 1992 and DS9 hadn't even premiered yet.

Practically, I wonder how they would have designed the interior. If they made it "realistic" there'd be deck after deck of identical corridors, crew quarters, cargo bays, and other nondescript locations, when everybody would really want to see the bridge, engineering, sickbay, and the transporter room, none of which are big enough to hold more than a dozen or so people at once. All the interesting rooms would fit in a much smaller space, say, the size of a film studio:

farm4.staticflickr.com

A way to handle that would be to put copies of those rooms on every deck. People would take the elevator and have no idea where they were because none of the rooms have windows.
 
2012-04-07 11:23:47 PM

Relatively Obscure: I like the Star Wars quote reference in the Star Trek headline. It might be too subtle of a troll, but I like it.


Came here to say this, subby... Oh and....

i291.photobucket.com

That's not even from your franchise!
 
2012-04-07 11:30:21 PM

Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: elchip:
I dunno. Star Trek: The Experience wasn't able to stay profitable, and it was far cheaper to create and maintain than this would have been.

That's because it sucked. It had about as much in common with Star Trek as the MGM Grand down the road did. They blew a golden opportunity to make the entire casino into another world and instead they just partitioned off part of it into a museum and called their bar "Quark's". You build a hotel that looks like the Enterprise, where all of the rooms look like ship staterooms, and include all of the elements from the show and that place would rock.


Except that under the redevelopment rules set by the other casinos, the Enterprise could have neither hotel rooms nor gambling. This wasn't some entrepreneur trying to build a profitable project, it was existing casino owners trying to draw tourists away from the mega-resorts being built on the south strip.


So imagine building a full-size replica of the Enterprise with only "Experience"-like attractions, maybe a museum and some sets and a wedding chapel to support it financially. Now imagine owners who could give two craps about Star Trek and who would get pissed if the project made enough revenue that they thought it was cannibalizing their properties.

Jaffe was entirely correct.
 
2012-04-07 11:38:05 PM
Downtown Las Vegas. Hookers, bums, drunks and losers. And filthy too, no matter the glowing ceiling they installed as an alternative. The seedy part of Sin City. But also the best odds in gambling and more relaxed, imo.

That said, they should've pitched Deep Space Nine's space station -- proof the Star Trek universe isn't a picture perfect utopia.
 
2012-04-07 11:43:26 PM
They could have done the first Enterprise that Captain Archer had. It would have been just as cool, recognizable and much smaller.
 
2012-04-07 11:45:18 PM

GAT_00: Mugato: GAT_00: I actually think that was the dumbest part of the reboot, constructing something that size inside a gravity well. WTF.

In Iowa no less.

The dumbest part for me was Kirk jumping from cadet to captain.

I can actually justify that a bit. One, almost the entire class he was in just got wiped the fark out. Two, the few ship's staff that weren't trainees - Pike, Medical - got injured or killed. So we have a fully functional ship, no available personnel, and a guy who rocketed to the top of his class.

It's a stretch, but it isn't quite as dumb as it could be


Please, Kirk to Captain is one of the dumbest things ever done in any of the Star Trek films or shows-right there with Spock's Brain or the 24th Century dune buggy or Janeway turning into a lizard. They had to get the crew in place by the end of the first movie and they jammed Kirk into that command chair with some of the weakest writing around.
There was mention in the movie of "the rest of the fleet", so nobody in that fleet was better qualified than a cadet to take over a ship? Really?
Another great one is " Kirk saved the world and they rewarded him" No, he really didn't. Spock located he future ship, Spock stole it and stopped the drill with it ( saving the earth right there) Spock led the Romulan ship away from Earth and inflicted heavy damage on it with the future ship. Kirk got his arse kicked, found Pike (Spock told him where he was) and still has to have Pike save him. Spock saved the Earth and was already the ship's executive officer, he should have been given command.
All while Kirk shows command precense by starting two different violent confrontations on the bridge, the second one resulting in a mutany. But hey, give him the big chair.

All they had to do was include a simple "three years later" tag at the end. They'd still have erased a dozen years or so of Kirk's backstory, but it would have made a tad more sense than what they showed in the movie.
 
2012-04-07 11:47:42 PM

Manfred J. Hattan: Jaffe was entirely correct.


And he was forced out when Viacom bought Paramount two years later, so if it had flopped it wouldn't have been his problem after all.
 
2012-04-07 11:53:30 PM

t3knomanser: Mugato: The new Trek movie revived the franchise

I'd argue that it revived the brand, by establishing an entirely new franchise that uses iconography from the original. Essentially, they made the movie accessible and profitable by jettisoning pretty much all the themes that defined Star Trek and keeping all the branding elements that sold Star Trek.

Savvy business, I suppose.


well it was suppose to be in the mirror universe.
 
2012-04-07 11:56:41 PM

Your_Huckleberry: All while Kirk shows command precense by starting two different violent confrontations on the bridge, the second one resulting in a mutany. But hey, give him the big chair.


Spock from the future is a pretty good personal reference on his job application.
 
2012-04-08 12:24:28 AM

Nem Wan: Your_Huckleberry: All while Kirk shows command precense by starting two different violent confrontations on the bridge, the second one resulting in a mutany. But hey, give him the big chair.

Spock from the future is a pretty good personal reference on his job application.


Are we REALLY having this conversation again?
 
2012-04-08 12:27:50 AM

Your_Huckleberry: Please, Kirk to Captain is one of the dumbest things ever done in any of the Star Trek films or shows


Ehh, it's dumb but it isn't "Threshold" dumb.

The only thing about it that annoyed me was that it was completely unnecessary. You could have the exact same scene and have the movie end on the same high note just by putting a "2 years later" title up before it. Kirk still gets to be captain, but he does it in a very fast amount of time, rather than a ludicrously fast amount of time.
 
2012-04-08 12:33:59 AM

Nem Wan: Your_Huckleberry: All while Kirk shows command precense by starting two different violent confrontations on the bridge, the second one resulting in a mutany. But hey, give him the big chair.

Spock from the future is a pretty good personal reference on his job application.


Probably unnecessary.
Lest we forget the original Kirk once stole a starship for purely personal reasons, blew it up, stole a second starship from another species, STILL managed to get back on everyone's good graces AND got ANOTHER ship.
What people forget is that he was never the man the federation wanted, he's what they needed. Even from TOS episodes. Unlike other rule-mongering captains, Kirk could think outside the box and get results.

The rebooted Kirk isn't too far off from the original.

/Funny how the guy who compared a bad movie to a bad building knew all about making bad movies.
/Short sighted fool.
 
2012-04-08 12:38:39 AM
So, the city fathers basically sat down and asked:
2.bp.blogspot.com

What does Las Vegas need with a starship?

/really people 35 in and no one said it.
 
2012-04-08 12:44:04 AM
The acceleration stress of full impulse would exceed that of the stresses of being in a gravity well. Full impulse exceeded 9.8 meters per second squared. The aerodynamics of being in an atmosphere would suck, but they could also reconfigure the shields to function like a big wing.
 
2012-04-08 01:03:40 AM

Any Pie Left: The Paramount exec's reasoning tells you everything you need to know about the psychology of studio heads and why they lack the balls to greenlight original movie projects.

As far as building the thing full scale, well, there would have been some difficulties cantilevering the structure. It would have been expensive to do right, and maintenance would have been a constant issue. Keeping the outside looking good in the harsh sunlight and heat would have been a continuing cost, as well as the air conditioning. You'd also have a lot of inaccessible "dead space" in the pylons and nacelles, and would have to make some compromises for ADA rules and etc. I wouldn't have killed it for the reasons the Paramount exec had, but I'd have had to be really convinced by the architects and engineers about the costs vs. ROI.

I never got to experience the Quarks bar and stuff before they shut it down, but to me, that kind of construction made more sense since all that viewers experience of the Enterprise is really just interior spaces. The interior topology is way more important. Seeing it reproduced in exterior form is cool and all, but not entirely necessary to the overall experience. I mean, if it was a real starship you'd only get that view in space while in a space suit.

I think it would be more practical and much less complex to build a circular hotel/ride tower with a rectangular annex building, where the interiors could combine a BIG recreation of several saucer section decks to "play" in/tour, PLUS convention space and regular "mundane" hotel rooms. For a bonus, a couple of more "decks" in the tower could be fit out in TOS furnishings and decor and used as hotel rooms too. This way, you have the best of both. You'd of course have the voice-command turbo-lift elevators too, and gift shops so you could dress up. Since the tower has lots of floor space, you could even have a TNG bridge and saucer deck/ten forward, AND a TOS one as well. You'd have room to put the bridg ...


They addressed many of those in the original article linked from TFA. The cantilevering issues would have been solved by postulating that the ship was in an Earth-ground drydock, complete with supports and anchoring structures.

ADA wouldn't seem to have been an issue, as they'd conceived of their own high-speed "turbolift" that would transport visitors from place to place, apparently horizontally as well as vertically, and I doubt they'd planned to make the nacelles accessible, but maybe visible from the engineering section.

They specifically wanted the exterior, as that was what would make it a spectacular attraction.

It couldn't be a hotel, because the idea was to draw traffic in to attend the other hotels in the area, not compete with them.

I do like the idea upthread of making the exit the holodeck entrance. "Las Vegas program complete. Enter when ready."
 
2012-04-08 01:06:34 AM
And people say I'm crazy for wanting to build a life size Serenity.

/is actually going to build a life size Serenity someday
 
2012-04-08 01:18:45 AM

optikeye: The Exit to Vegas would be through the Holodeck.


Dude... I need to start a multi-billion dollar corporation so I can have an office where the door is a holodeck arch.
 
2012-04-08 01:30:03 AM

Britney Spear's Speculum: Wasn't pretty enough and God let it die.


Well of course. God has no need for a starship.
 
2012-04-08 01:32:30 AM
i486.photobucket.com
i486.photobucket.com
i486.photobucket.com
I'd be cool with just the green chicks.....
 
2012-04-08 01:37:50 AM

elchip: I dunno. Star Trek: The Experience wasn't able to stay profitable, and it was far cheaper to create and maintain than this would have been.


Maybe if they would have changed up the story on it and did something else instead of the same story up until the end. It was the same thing all the way until like a year before it closed. It was expensive to boot. When I went when i was 14, it cost $35 to go though for a 15 minute show. It did come with unlimited access for the day but I didnt care to go through again because it was just meh. The Quarks Bar thing was cool though. Wasnt too badly priced to get screwed up and wasnt all that busy. Went for a couple birthday parties at it before it closed.
 
2012-04-08 01:38:55 AM
Good thing that they didn't build it. Downtown Vegas already smells bad enough without all of the layers of old crusted Nerd sperm that would be all over it if they did build it.
 
2012-04-08 01:52:46 AM
It would have been too much, the correct call was made.
 
2012-04-08 02:04:55 AM

elchip: I dunno. Star Trek: The Experience wasn't able to stay profitable, and it was far cheaper to create and maintain than this would have been.


That's actually not true. Paramount Parks was unable to stay profitable and ST:TE was closed when it folded, Despite being the sole attraction that made money, they decided it was an all or nothing thing.

Who would have thought a movie studio was made up of idiots?
 
2012-04-08 02:07:52 AM
I love how the Weeners after the article was from some Trekkie observing that it wouldn't be possible to build it in Vegas because the Enterprise was built in microgravity.

lol
 
2012-04-08 02:15:39 AM

jaflasvegas: elchip: I dunno. Star Trek: The Experience wasn't able to stay profitable, and it was far cheaper to create and maintain than this would have been.

Maybe if they would have changed up the story on it and did something else instead of the same story up until the end. It was the same thing all the way until like a year before it closed. It was expensive to boot. When I went when i was 14, it cost $35 to go though for a 15 minute show. It did come with unlimited access for the day but I didnt care to go through again because it was just meh. The Quarks Bar thing was cool though. Wasnt too badly priced to get screwed up and wasnt all that busy. Went for a couple birthday parties at it before it closed.


$35 bucks for that stupid story on I saw on Youtube? Uggg. "Captain Picard no longer exists... but somehow we remember him despite the changes to the space-time continuum." (as O'Brien says, "I hate temporal mechanics!) "You people, we brought you up to the bridge for one reason, and that reason is..." *Trekkie in tour group raises hand* "To fight the Klingon ships closing on us as seen on the view screen?" (fulfilling his nerd fantasy) - "No, we're going to bring you back down to the transporter room." - "Why did you bring us up *here* then?!?
 
2012-04-08 02:16:18 AM

Relatively Obscure: I like the Star Wars quote reference in the Star Trek headline. It might be too subtle of a troll, but I like it.


Yeah, I'm surprised no one has posted the "live long and prosper-Han Solo" image yet, tired as it is...
 
Displayed 50 of 106 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report