Most Helpful Customer Reviews
23 of 23 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
"The original is better.", January 22, 2007
This review is from: Spacecraft 2100 to 2200 AD (Paperback)
I know this is a cliche, and is said about pretty much every remake of movies, books, music, etc. However, if you've ever seen the original Spacecraft 2000-2100 AD, there's really no question that it's true in this case.
There's not a whole lot of new material in this book- just a few extra ships (in fact, more seem to have been removed than added) and an updated history section. They also incremented the time period by a century and tried to tie it in with modern events to make it a plausible future. Additionally, the artwork has been redone with computer graphics, and most of the line drawing schematics and diagrams have been removed. This is likely a result of the smaller page layout and shorter general length of this book.
First, regarding the change in the history. I don't think anyone really cares how plausible it is, so I'm rather puzzled why the authors thought it was necessary. Also notably lacking are some of the more interesting discussions, e.g. the unknown objects/ghost ships in the original.
The main reason for picking up this title, however, is the artwork. The pictures are essentially remakes of the original- most have only minor cosmetic changes. There's a few new pictures, but they are generally small and look a bit rushed. This is where the book really suffers- the original artwork was painted and had gorgeous detail and a distinct style. The new CGI stuff, with the probable exception of lighting, is simply not as good. It's not even up to the quality of what you'd see in common sci-fi shows, and this isn't a motion picture. Coupled with the fact that the pages are smaller, it's definitely a downgrade.
The descriptive text is shortened as well, and yes there are typos. I'm not overly bothered by this, but the lack of added material is a bit perplexing. The specifications are unchanged as far as I can tell, but the diagrams that graced the old book are gone. While some of those were a bit confusing, I think they added to the overall feel of the universe. One plus on the text aspect: they make it pretty clear which text block goes with which illustration. In the original, it did require a bit of guesswork at times.
I'd advise potential readers to get the original, but chances are that if you want this book you already have the original. As such, it's advisable you just stick with that. It's simply a superior publication, and I'm quite disappointed that the remake is of such mediocre quality.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
A waste of money, December 21, 2006
This review is from: Spacecraft 2100 to 2200 AD (Paperback)
I picked this up without even really looking at the inside, just because I had loved the original Stewart Cowley books so much, which I keep my eyes out for in used book stores.
When I finally started reading this at home, I was totally annoyed that I had actually bought this. While there are three or four new ships, it's all just a poor rehash of the original Spacecraft 2000 to 2100 AD, which is just a much better book.
The hackneyed introduction referring to the 9/11 attacks and how things evolved from there was just annoying and a waste of space.
What's worse, is that all the ships now look as if they've been buffed and polished with wax, none of them look like they've been used at all. Maybe the publisher was in a rush to get this out by Xmas, but do yourself a favor and skip it completely. It's just not worth it.
Which is a shame to say, because I love this style of artwork, but the original is just so much better. For example, the Sentinal Major just looks goofy now, without the depth of the original paintings.
Actually, the worst part is that there are only a few new ships, what a rip-off! This was the most frustrating part of the whole process of reading it. The new ships also don't seem to have much imagination applied to them as well, being either NASA or possibly Star Wars rip-offs. The originality and colors and look of the originals have all been lost. Which is a shame.
Hopefully, this publisher and authores will do a better job with future books, and not just rip off the past, but build upon it in the future.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Spacecraft 2100 to 2200AD needs a Proof Reader, November 9, 2006
This review is from: Spacecraft 2100 to 2200 AD (Paperback)
I am a fan of the original Terran Trade Authority Handbooks written by Stewart Cowley. Weaving together a storyline of a vast spacefaring future by using the diverse artwork of many artists, Cowley created a future history much loved by many Sci Fi fans. Morrigan Press has attempted to recapture this period with the first of it's artwork books (and is also releasing an RPG) set in the TTA universe.
Morrigan Press have advanced the original timeline 100 years to keep it forward looking, and have reworked the first book in the original series. Using CGI artwork based on most of the original painted artwork, and including condensed versions of the original spacecraft write ups, Morrigan have produced a good first attempt, which obviously leans heavily on the Original "Spacecraft 2000 to 2100". Of interest is a new historical section outlining the unification of Earth, first contact with Alpha Centuari, and the devastating Proxima Wars.
However there are some issues with the book, which many fans have found disappointing. First and foremost is the vast amount of typos and other errata that have crept into the text. There are misspelt words consistently throughout the entire book. There are repeated paragraphs in the history section, a jumbled paragraph in a writeup and in one instance repeated ship stats. The typos get more and more irritating as one reads the book and distract from the "willing suspension of disbelief" necessary for this type of book. The impression is rapidly formed that noone actually read the manuscipt before it was rushed off to the printers.
Another issue is the CGI artwork. Unlike the original artwork which was done by a variety of artists, this artwork was done all done by a single artist. This tends to detract from the sense of difference of races achieved in the original by using different artists. While most of the artwork is great, it is obvious in several examples that the artist was pressed for time and this has resulted in some disappointingly underworked pieces. When looking at the vessels portrayed in the artwork, one is also struck with a sense of newness about them. Indeed many of the vessels illustrated as being in the middle of a long and dirty war, have a distinctly just left the showroom floor look about them.
A small point worth bringing up is that the book is available only in soft cover. As a fan of the original series, which was all hardback, this surprised me, and was a trifle disappointing.
Perhaps the most disappoiting aspect for old fans was the almost complete deletion of a section outlining unknown alien artifacts discovered by the TTA in space. This section in the original gave a xenoarchaeology slant on things, and reenforced the sense that it's a big Galaxy, and we don't know exactly who and what is out there.
A final point of note is that the book contains a foreword from each of the two writers who reworked Cowley's material, however there is nothing from Cowley himself. I found this surprising, as he is still credited on the front cover with the other two writers.
In conclusion Spacecraft 2100-2200 AD is not a bad first attempt to ressurect the TTA universe. Old fans will be disappointed in many ways, but will hopefully be happy to see some new material on the TTA. People new to the TTA universe should enjoy this book, but will need to overcome the constant typos and errata that distract throughout the book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
