Detailed Look At Star Trek (Toy) Prop Designs

Published 6 years ago by , Updated February 10th, 2012 at 7:21 am,

new phaser toy2 Detailed Look At Star Trek (Toy) Prop DesignsThere have been images of Playmate toys related to the new Star Trek movie floating about, but today I came across the cleanest versions of them yet. There are pics of the the new transporter room and bridge plus a detailed look at the new tricorder.

Oh and a first clear look at the phaser. icon smile Detailed Look At Star Trek (Toy) Prop Designs

Now keep in mind of course that these are toys, and probably prototypes at that – so don’t get all wound up if they don’t look as great as you might expect. Also, I understand that the phaser doesn’t look nearly as shiny as depicted below, but has more of a brushed steel look with grey highlights that harken back to the original props.

And as a bonus there’s a two view line drawing of the new Enterprise, with a comparison against the original movie version of the NCC-1701.

new transporter toy Detailed Look At Star Trek (Toy) Prop Designs
New Star Trek transporter room

new bridge Detailed Look At Star Trek (Toy) Prop Designs
New Star Trek Enterprise bridge

new tricorder toy Detailed Look At Star Trek (Toy) Prop Designs
New Star Trek tricorder

new communicator toy2 Detailed Look At Star Trek (Toy) Prop Designs
New Star Trek communicator

new phaser toy2 Detailed Look At Star Trek (Toy) Prop Designs
New Star Trek phaser

enterprise comparison Detailed Look At Star Trek (Toy) Prop Designs
Compare original movie NCC-1701 to new design
(Click on image for larger version)

I have to say that the new ship design doesn’t look as bad to me in this comparison image, but I still think that the rear of the secondary hull looks too thin and I wish the support pylons attached to the nacelles farther back. It looks like there is no way those pylons could support the nacelles from an engineering standpoint.

The tricorder isn’t bad – looks like a cross between the Next Generation design and the original. The phaser? Not to sure about that one… I think they may have gone all shiny on it so it looks better on camera, it certainly has lots of gizmo details. If you want larger versions of all of these images click on the Flikr link below.

So what do you think?

Star Trek opens on May 8, 2009.

Sources: Flikr (hat tip to AICN),

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. I just watched a couple of episodes of the old series, Lee-Unit, and in fact you’re spot-on: the outer ring starts virtually right behind the Captain’s chair. The bridge was normally shot quite low down from the front, and I think because it was visually less busy than this one I just remembered it larger. My mistake!

  2. Well I like the new Enterprise. In response to some previous comments I would state the following:

    On the subject of the glass on the bridge it might be wise to consider the idea of Acrylic glass. When I was a young man (age 15) I watched one of my friends try to jump his skateboard (Vision Psycho Stick board with Slimeball wheels, Swiss bearings and Independent Trucks for those interested in such things) down a flight of stairs at a mall. My friend was about the same size as a typical Ensign Ricky Type on Star Trek and he hit a PLEXIGLAS window going at a considerable amount of speed, the glass vibrated slightly and he bounced off of it with several bruises and a bloody nose. I’m sure Star Fleet has access to materials at least as durable as PLEXIGLAS and canon backs me up. Look at what they used to house the whales in ST IV; Transparent Aluminum gave every indication of having greater structural integrity than any transparent material on Earth circa 1986.

    If track record is any indication JJ Abrams (Lost, Fringe, Cloverfield, et al) will do a much better job with the Trek franchise than Berman and Braga (Enterprise, Voyager, et al). Abrams would be hard pressed to ignore continuity as badly as those jokers did. I often wonder how many Trek fans are upset with Abrams because of his statements about this film being for film fans and not Trek fans. I wonder how many of them are upset at him for admitting that he was always more of a Star Wars fan than a Trek fan. I also wonder if those statements don’t anger certain Trek fans to the point that they don’t want to give this film a chance. I’m not saying that is the case here, but their does seem to be a great deal of nitpicking over minutiae that will have very little influence the story or characters. I think most long term Trek fans will notice the little differences, but if the story is compelling and the new cast do a good job in their respective roles all will be forgiven.

  3. First off I’m not a big fan of Playmates. Ever since Diamond Select Toy/Art Asylum has gotten the rights to Star Trek they have been producing much better looking toys. Granted they cost more money but they tailor to avid collectors who are looking for decent representations of characters, ships, and props. With the new film line Playmates clearly fails this. I am not at all impressed with the sculpting of the action figures and really disappointed at the design of the phaser and tricorder. I’m am hoping the actual props look much better than that but my hopes aren’t high. Let’s just say I’m not at all impressed or surprised. :(

  4. It’s nice to see the side-by-side comparison of the two ships. The positioning of the nacelles is visually unsettling. It just doesn’t quite look right, but then I thought the same thing about seeing the supports so far back on Enterprise D. When you look at someone else’s interpretations you’ll always have your own biases, but ultimately you take what you get or just don’t take it at all. The only thing I REALLY wish they had done was angle the nacelle supports back like they did on the movie 1701/1701-A. That would have made the new design absolutely superlative and tied into the 1701-A arrangement a lot better.

    But, we’re only getting limited images of the new Enterprise. As someone else said, I’ll have to see this thing in motion.. not to mention get my hands on one of the toys so I can look it over.. to really get used to the design. The 1701-A will always remain my favorite, but I do enjoy seeing new interpretations.

  5. Sorry, but if you are doing a prequel to Star Trek, then the ship should at least look a tiny bit like the Enterprise. I am not sure what this junk is supposed to be, but it ISN’T the Enterprise.
    It would be like re-doing the “Dukes of Hazzard” and using a Ford Escort as the General Lee.
    I mean, we all knew things were going to be different with the new movie…but this is too drastic of a change for a major sci-fi Icon.
    Oh well. When this movie flops at the box office, we can be hopeful that someone will come along in another ten years and actually get it right.
    The problem with most of these Hollywood producers and directors is that they ALL want to do remakes of classic, well established material, but at the same time they all want to change the material that made these things the classics that they are.
    Just make the stupid film and don’t screw with the props that made the series so memorable.

  6. Haven’t you guys ever heard of translucent aluminum? SHEESH.

  7. You should totally come out with Mcoy from star trek in a enterprise uniform and Chekov in his enterprise uniform and also Kirk in his snow jacket and them in their jumpsuits and scotty in his snow jacket and all of them in there cadet uniforms also neros men and kirk in his black uniform and thats pretty much it thx

    P.s. All of them need to be 3in. and 3/4 and come with a piece of the bridge