Detailed Look At Star Trek (Toy) Prop Designs

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

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

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.

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.

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. :(

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.

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!

@ Big Dentist

On second glance, I agree that it's very close to the size of the original, but did the original have enough seats for those 20 people to sit in? I count 15 in the picture.

@ Just David

Actually, the minor changes to the Excelsior class didn't really bother me.

The Excelsior class looked quite neat actually.

What bothered me was that they named it "Enterprise".

The friggin FLAGSHIP of the fleet.

As for the JJprise(TM) ... I want to see this thing in motion. THEN we'll discuss it further.

Enterprise-B; The Excelsior with a gland problem! :)

The ugliest ship in the fleet. Worse than J.J.'s Enterprise. Far worse!

Lee-Unit, that bridge looks about the same size as TOS to me, just that the outer "ring" was railed off and raised, which might have made it appear smaller.

David, that link's got the best view I've seen yet of the new Enterprise, even if it is a toy. Still not entirely convinced, and probably won't be till I see it in motion, but it's actually quite funky in that shot. With you on the Enterprise-C, and I know what you mean about the D. That was a proper departure from the original, and resembled a gorged goose waiting for its liver to be extracted. I grew to love it in the end. The real ugly beast of the bunch in my opinion was the B from Generations, which looked like some kind of mad bath designed by Philippe Starck in the depths of an ether binge.

Hey Greenknight, don't forget to stock up on some food. You don't want to pass out from hunger mid way through your marathon! :)

@ D. Hasselbach: "Just David." I like it. ;)

@ David Hasselbach

My wife enjoys Sci-Fi & comic book movies as much as I do (when we figured that one out I think I asked her to marry me...well that and her carrot cake :) ) We love Star Trek & Babylon 5 and we both know we will love the new BSG..We are just waiting for a time when our kids survival is less dependent on us and they can more capably fend for themselves before we delve into BSG series..One episode at a time would be the mature approach and I know she has the will power to do this but I on the other hand would fold like a dry cleaners on a Saturday morning and hence be lost to them for a span of time as of yet predetermined to watch the two seasons we have and then I would have to rush out to get the rest of the episodes and well then we get into a cycle that no good can come from especially for me...Dog-house would only be a joke..

By-the-way...it has been killing me not to go on that thread:
"WHo is the last Cylon?"

Cheers

@greenknight ... and David (later on)

Know the feeling. But my wife usually gets addicted to the same shows as me.
And as long as we haven't got kids ... we're only hurting ourselves when we skip an entire weeks sleep for an two entire THE SHIELD series(es) ...
Uhm ... well ... my point?
None, why? I should be in bed anyway. :)

Okay, back to the "1701-A" debate:
we will NOT see our old, beloved A in the future movies.
Sorry David. (Or as I shall call you "Just David" in my head from now on).
Engineers love to change things, very true and if they continue THIS Trek movie, we will most likely get to see an "upgraded" version of THIS Enterprise.
The old Starfleet designs MAY have an occasional cameo, but these new people with their own new style sure as hell want to keep it.

I will remain cautiously optimistic about the new movie.
Abrams let me down with M:I3 before and I stopped watching LOST (until people tell me that there actually is one HELL of a sane and logic ending), so ... come on, surprise me, J.J.!

@ David

I have two seasons of the new BSG on DVD but have not got around to watching it..probably because when I start I will be addicted and my wife and kids will be wondering what in the hell happened to Dad for a week...Lock myself in the attic with only my tv and the dvd player and get caught up...can get smelly up there after a week with only my two-year old's potty for a bathroom respite... ;)

I wont jump on you Greenknight and you make a valid point. I still hope your completely wrong, but I doubt it! If this movie is a runaway hit the changes from the TOS style will only become more prevalent until only the names remain the same! :) Still there is a chance that Rodenberry's vision could survive mostly intact. Just like the original Battlestar Galactica's did! :P

As for 1701 vs. 1701-A in future movies; I hope we get a chance to see what this incarnation can do before they go and change it again. But like McCoy said: "Engineers just love to change things".

WHo says it will be that ship (NCC1701-A) will make it in future movies...I guess we really won't know which of the old series designs will make it into sequels and how much they are going to change the mythos...they could toss a lot of great history for the sake of selling this brand to a new generation..this is just speculation so don't jump on me for making a point of idle speculation... ;)

there should be no comparisons to the 1701-A as that hasn't come out in the time this movie takes place (in it's alternate timeline form, that is).

The N1701-A of this timeline won't be out for years...perhaps in a sequel to this movie?

man, i hope the bring back the original Chirping ring to the comunicator.
thats what my cell phone ringtone is.
and i allwase answer "Kirk here".
Lolz

Annys:

So you mean there's a chance that they might install fuses under the console terminals and keyboards this time around to prevent spurious sparking and electrical fires?

The glass is probably not glass, as we know it - probably something much tougher and less likely to shatter?

@David

Oh man... I had the communicator pic but forgot to add it to the post.

Also, I apologize for the less than stellar image quality - I was using the Mac version of the software I usually use and was not used to it yet, and didn't save the images at a high enough quality level.

Vic

Like Greenknight & Lee-Unit, I too like the new look of The Enterprise (actually I'm a convert), but all those years of the TOS and motion picture design doesn't change my perception that it looks a little off. Much the way 1701-D didn't look quite right when it first hit the screen, which also grew on me. BTW my favorite TNG design is 1701-C.

I've always been a fan of the gadgets and gizmos, my favorite part I guess. I really like the new tricorder and phaser and if you want to see a picture of the communicator:

http://www.usatoday.com/life/lifestyle/2009-01-...

When you get there, click on the "First Look" link on the page. There is also a shot from above of the 14 inch Enterprise model. It's not just an ibridge, it's the whole iEnterprise.

One more thing; Isn't the two tricorder pictures upside down to each other?

First, the phaser and tricorder. They are pictures of toys; so I won't judge color schemes or anything like that, but I like the shapes of both. They look like decent updated versions of the originals.

The transporter room, again a toy, so-so. I'll wait to see it in the movie. The one in the picture does look very cheap though.

The bridge; I have issues. The red floor is remenicent of the Enterprise-E, but doesn't fit here. And David, I was thinking the same thing about those glass panels and red shirts, lol. Maybe they'll break in the movie and be deemed a safety hazard by Starfleet and removed from the ship. And personally, I don't like that it looks like you could fit 18 to 20 people on the bridge. It's a bit big.

Finally, the Enterprise. Vic, just a suggestion, maybe you could post a schematic of the TOS enterprise instead of the TMP version. I think people would see a lot more in common between the new one and that one than the one posted.

Greenknight, you are actually in the majority now, because I also like the design. I couldn't tell a lot of detail in the first photo they posted, but these drawings look very well done. And I know it's not perfect, (i.e. the pylons and engineering hull,) but I definately see the TOS in that design, and it works for me.

I don't know if Warp Speed (FTL) travel will ever be possible but I think if the answer to transversing the vast reaches of space is found it will be found in quantum physics and more likely in the Law of Superposition...WHich would technically not be travelling faster than light speed but rather being everywhere at once and truly understanding how to use the Unified Field Theory..

Here is a cool article on the new Star Trek comic book which I think is a tie-in to the new film..

********WARNING********
****SPOILERS AHEAD*****

Here is the link:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39855

I think the new ship looks great and is aesthetically pleasing enough in it's design and it captures the old design of the Enterprise from the Original Series while capturing a more modern look for the new franchise...I think the new design actually looks more stable then the NCC-1701 but I know I will be in the minority on that one...

I am guardedly looking forward to this one ... I hope Abrams doesn't screw this one up...

Well then. I stand in defiance! I think the new ship looks great!!

@Ash Ali - I think we all know that - but it doesn't make them look any less *wrong*.

I guess I'm the only one who seems to love the new design. I love the whole retro-future look, it's simply splendid. And as far as the pylons and nacelles are concerned, in science fiction and films about the future, assumptions can be made that they are using materials or technology in which the pylons can and do support the nacelles in that fashion. And the fact that it's a movie and it doesn't matter since warp speed defies Einstein's theory of special relativity.