Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests

Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?

Discussion concerning the TV, film, and comic adaptations.

Do you like the Graphic Novel's Space Ships?

1) Yes, I like the fins.
10
15%
2) No, I prefer canon ships with impellers.
55
85%
 
Total votes : 65
Re: Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?
Post by MaxxQ   » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:00 am

MaxxQ
BuNine

Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 5:08 pm
Location: Greer, South Carolina USA

cralkhi wrote:
MaxxQ wrote:Remember that Evergreen are trying to make a movie that will make enough money that they can continue to do so. I'm realistic enough to know that if that means point-blank missile battles, visible lasers and grasers, "swoosh" sounds, and engine trails on missiles, then so be it.


Isn't this kind of a "self fulfilling prophecy" though? In that nobody makes movies that do it realistically, so we don't actually know that they would sell fewer tickets.

Somebody has to be the first, otherwise everybody just copies how Star Wars (or whatever) did it forever...


I agree. The problem is that it's such an expensive risk. Nobody wants to invest million$ in a movie hoping to make it back without giving the audience what they expect. I mentioned elsewhere that I had heard a couple-three decades ago that a film has to make 1.5x the budget in box office gross in order to break even. If the Honor Harrington movie costs Evergreen $75m to make, they will need to gross $113m just to break even.

Doesn't seem like a whole lot, until you think that they would probably *like* to make at least triple that so they can make another film.

The last movie to do space right was 2001, back in 1968, and for its time, it actually did very well. Try to do it the same way today and it may still be a critical success, but it would end up a complete commercial flop.

Now, one thing that strikes me as interesting is that Evergreen are not a Hollywood-based studio. There's a possibility that they may be far enough from the copycat mindset of Hollyweird that they may be willing to take the risk. I honestly would like to see them do just that, but IMO, I don't think they will. They may try for a compromise between realism and Star Wars-y.

We just don't know enough. All we've seen are a few comic covers. The movie, last I heard, is slated for a 2016 release, so things may change between now and then.
Top
Re: Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?
Post by HungryKing   » Mon Jan 27, 2014 12:49 pm

HungryKing
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 369
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 9:43 pm

I've had an idea on how to stay reasonably canon while still making various star nations visibly different, this thread has caused me to advance my ideas.
1 Each ship fitter has their own set of fiddley bits, Haven looks bulky and crude, Andermandi look smooth but angular, Manticore looks smooth and organic, Sollies have several sets that generally look organic and often, but not always 'old fashioned', sometimes the differing suppliers can be seen in a single Solly ship.

2 Also each ship designer has their own pattern, based on their native fiddly bits, Manticore has smooth seamless organic hulls that barely swells where there is armor, Haven has blocky hulls with crude seamed armor obviously over a hull (the unarmored areas on a frame that carries thick armor shoud be visibly lower than the frames that carry little armor), the Andermandi have smooth hulls with angular nearly seamless armor mostly integrated with the hull (visible if you know to look for it), the Sollie have nearly organic, not quite smooth hulls, with smooth seamed armor less integrated than that of the Andis, but more integrated than that of the Havenites (visible but not blatent).

3 Pre Alliance Grayson and Masadan, look rather close, but Grayson's equippment is a bit smoother and smaller. They both have some foreign fiddly bits, Masadan's bits look Havenite, Grayson's Solly. Both have areas where you can see bare hull, Grayson's is welded, most Masadan is riveted, save for their leader ships, which in addition to having better equipment, and a better paint job, have their hull welded and riveted.

3 Each modern nation has their own hull coloring scheme, Manticore had White tinged with irridescent gold, Andermandi are opalescent black, Haven's hulls are white tained with greenish gray, when they go stealthy, everyone turn matte black. The vessels vessels loaned to Masada have a garrish Red and Gold that mirrors their paint scheme, Modern Grayson vessels will move to a blue tinged White, their original paint job is a light blue.

4 Each nation has their set of hull lights, different colors and arrangements. Small craft docking ports, and eva ports especially, this gives good indication of size, and allows at a glance CL or DD (DDs don't have docking ports on the side).


Thus you can tell which star nation produced a given ship, what type is, and who currently owns it. Though there would be some call for producing regression parameters for the legecy units (really old Havenite stuff might be less crude).

Each star nation should also have its own set ofcommand insignia, everything from, I'm a division leader, to I've got the Head of State aboard.
Top
Re: Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?
Post by Yow   » Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:10 pm

Yow
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 3:32 pm
Location: North Carolina, United States

I think these two have hit on a possible solution and don't even know it yet. Serving on ships I can tell you it hard to figure out who's other ship it is sometimes. Now when i see people on the decks in uniform or a flag flying or the style of the hull number, I am like "Oh look, we've been joined by the Russians. When did they get here?" Same scenario with the French, British, Germans. If you look and the ship isn't familiar, try using scene before or after, that establish who they are with who mans them. Would work for me. Large scale or small with only a few slight differences and that how i start to associate ships with what nations they are from or who built them.

JohnRoth wrote: quoting "MaxxQ" quoting "Spacekiwi" So they are made a bit more stark towards each other then. Make the differences more apparent. IIRC, the only real difference between the ships in the pirates of the carribean were slight line changes and sails and colour, yet people were able to tell the difference between the pearl and the British ships. (Flying dutchman was another story). Add a paintjob to both ships, make the manty ship sleeker, and the havenite look more battered and built cheap like its a military nostromo, and they will be easily distinguishable i'm sure.... end SpaceKiwi's quote??

<shrug> Overall, I actually agree with you.

But as I said elsewhere, people are *conditioned* to expect both sides in a conflict to have ships that look vastly different from one another. PotC is an exception that proves the rule, but in the case of that film, I could point out that it's not really science fiction, and the people are *conditioned* to expect that wet-navy ships look somewhat alike. After all, not many people have problems or complain about not being able to tell one ship from another in various WWII movies.

The problem is that people for the most part *may* have difficulty translating that concept to spaceships, *because* they've been conditioned to expect major differences in spaceships. I think that artists are in the same fix, also. They've also been conditioned to distinguish between ships of various factions, and even if the artist himself isn't that way, their publisher may be forcing them to do that.

I think what Evergreen's trying to do is cater to that conditioning, while still trying to stay as canon as possible. Hopefully, if more movies get made, we will start to see the ships from the various navies lose more of the useless "greebles" and start to more closely resemble canon. end MAXXQ's quote

(Yow "sorry I couldn't figure out how to post it without the site rejecting for to many posts in a reply so i end quoted it :?: :!: any body can direct me to the how to's?? )

I'm not sure it's as much of a problem as people think, simply because I don't think it's necessary to show the ships during space battles. These things are, after all, microscopic compared to the distances involved. Let's take two examples of how I'd think a battle would play out.

First, the battle in Ms. Midshipman Harrington. Consider a control room with several Manticoran officers in skinsuits standing or sitting at consoles, facing a huge tactical display. Said tac display has range circles, an approaching ship and a big red line indicating energy range, or the range at which Captain Bafisch has decided he's going to open fire.

Now granted, that floor-to-ceiling tac display isn't showing what a real tac display would show - it's radically simplified for the audience.

Same for the other ship, except that the skinsuits are different, equipment is in different places, various indications that military discipline is a bit laxer, etc. Flip back and forth, making it very apparent that both of their tactical appreciations are seriously wrong, speeding up to increase tension.

Captain Bafisch says "Fire!" The simultaneous fire from the other ship wrecks his control room. Expressions flash across Honor's face as she assesses the situation, realizes she's the ranking officer, and rises to the occasion.

Where in this do we ever need to see the exterior of the ships?

Now, let's take the Battle of Mobius. Similar setup. The control rooms are different, the skinsuits are different colors and so forth. The missiles, though, are all inching their way across a huge tac display.

Maybe it's just me, but the only reason you need the ships to look really different is if there aren't any other cues in the scene as to whose ships you're looking at.


I love exterior shots think original SW intro. :P Very dramatic.

Cthia's father ~ "Son, do not cater to the common belief that a person has to earn respect. That is not true. You should give every person respect right from the start. What a person has to earn is your continued respect!"
Top
Re: Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?
Post by cralkhi   » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:08 am

cralkhi
Captain of the List

Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:27 am

MaxxQ wrote:The last movie to do space right was 2001, back in 1968, and for its time, it actually did very well.


Been a while since I've seen that, but if I remember correctly, the 'realistic' space parts were cool. The problem was the bizarre 70s psychedelic ending that went on way, way too long.

Try to do it the same way today and it may still be a critical success, but it would end up a complete commercial flop.


Why would it (or rather something similar but without the weird psychedelic stuff) necessarily do worse commercially today?
Top
Re: Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?
Post by Uroboros   » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:21 am

Uroboros
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2013 9:56 am

cralkhi wrote:
MaxxQ wrote:The last movie to do space right was 2001, back in 1968, and for its time, it actually did very well.


Been a while since I've seen that, but if I remember correctly, the 'realistic' space parts were cool. The problem was the bizarre 70s psychedelic ending that went on way, way too long.

Try to do it the same way today and it may still be a critical success, but it would end up a complete commercial flop.


Why would it (or rather something similar but without the weird psychedelic stuff) necessarily do worse commercially today?


'Cause ain't nobody got time for that.
Top
Re: Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?
Post by MaxxQ   » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:34 am

MaxxQ
BuNine

Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 5:08 pm
Location: Greer, South Carolina USA

cralkhi wrote:
MaxxQ wrote:The last movie to do space right was 2001, back in 1968, and for its time, it actually did very well.


Been a while since I've seen that, but if I remember correctly, the 'realistic' space parts were cool. The problem was the bizarre 70s psychedelic ending that went on way, way too long.

Try to do it the same way today and it may still be a critical success, but it would end up a complete commercial flop.


Why would it (or rather something similar but without the weird psychedelic stuff) necessarily do worse commercially today?


Because that sort of thing is boring to todays audiences. I hate to sound like a broken record, but when people nowadays think about science fiction movies set in space, they are conditioned to expect loud, colorful, and fast-paced action, not stately ships floating gracefully to The Blue Danube Waltz. Hell, even Gravity tried to get it right as far as accuracy (it failed in several places, but that's not really my point), and it still has fast-paced action - at least, so I've heard and judging by the trailers.
Top
Re: Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?
Post by MaxxQ   » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:35 am

MaxxQ
BuNine

Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 5:08 pm
Location: Greer, South Carolina USA

Uroboros wrote:'Cause ain't nobody got time for that.


I got bronchitis!!!
Top
Re: Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?
Post by cralkhi   » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:55 am

cralkhi
Captain of the List

Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:27 am

Hmmm. Maybe I DO need to watch 2001 again; I don't remember it being slow until the psychedelic bizarro colors stuff started happening (that part was boring, mostly because nothing comprehensible was happening).
Top
Re: Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?
Post by MaxxQ   » Wed Jan 29, 2014 2:33 am

MaxxQ
BuNine

Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 5:08 pm
Location: Greer, South Carolina USA

cralkhi wrote:Hmmm. Maybe I DO need to watch 2001 again; I don't remember it being slow until the psychedelic bizarro colors stuff started happening (that part was boring, mostly because nothing comprehensible was happening).


You and I may not think it's slow or boring. Nor may most everyone else here. But to the general audiences of today, yes, it will be considered slow, boring, and too much to think about. They'll wonder where the explosions are, why the spaceships are moving so slow, and what the hell do apes have to do with space in 2001.

BTW, in case anyone asks what 2001 was actually about, this is as good an explanantion as any, considering Kubrick deliberately never "explained" the movie, leaving it up to each viewer to have their own ideas: http://www.kubrick2001.com/ It'll take you about 15-20 minutes to get through, but it's really well done.
Top
Re: Do you like the Illustrated Novel Space Ships?
Post by Jonathan_S   » Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:44 am

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

MaxxQ wrote:The last movie to do space right was 2001, back in 1968, and for its time, it actually did very well. Try to do it the same way today and it may still be a critical success, but it would end up a complete commercial flop.
Well it was a much simpler scale, but I'd say Apollo 13 did space well. (within the admittedly very limited confines of the Apollo command module and LEM)

But that had the advantage of recreating a known event, not having to do imaginary, large, long duration spaceships.


I'm not a fan of the giant thrusters in the current art, just like I didn't like them on the cover art for my paperback of Honor Among Enemies, but if I have to I can live with them for the same of more Honorverse. (Or if the comics and/or movie turn out horribly I'll just pretend they never existed :D)
Top

Return to Multimedia