First Look At J.J. Abrams’ New USS Enterprise
Nov 11, 2008 by Vic HoltremanLet’s hear it: Do you LOVE the new Enterprise from the new Star Trek movie or HATE it?
Thanks to Entertainment Weekly, you are looking at the first full image of the redesigned USS Enterprise from the new Star Trek movie (you can head over there for a larger version).
As a long time Star Trek fan, whose favorite series is the original, my from-the-gut reaction when I first came across this was:
That is one ugly ship.
Here is what J.J. Abrams had to say in regards to the new design vs the original:
“If you’re going to do Star Trek there are many things you cannot change. The Enterprise is a visual touchstone for so many people. So if you’re going to do the Enterprise, it better look like the Enterprise, because otherwise, what are you doing?”
I don’t know… maybe it’ll grow on me or it will look awesome while in flight on the big screen, but at the moment it’s not doing it for me. While he went pretty “classic” with the saucer section (that’s “primary hull” for the Star Trek fans out there) the connecting pylon and the secondary (lower) hull just look… incongruous.
If I had to pick one word that comes to mind when I look at that image, it would be:
Taffy.
You know, that stretchy carnival candy? You get it warmed up and then you can pull on it and it stretches and thins? That’s what the secondary hull and the nacelles look like to me. The lower hull looks like it was molded out of clay, rolled between two hands and rolled narrower at one end.
Almost exactly one year ago I wrote a speculative post asking “How radical is the USS Enterprise Redesign?”
Pretty damned radical, it seems.
Here are some comparative images from that post to help put things in perspective:
The Original USS Enterprise NCC-1701
JJ Abrams’ Redesigned USS Enterprise NCC-1701
The USS Enterprise NCC-1701-A
Tell me the new design doesn’t look like the movie Enterprise saucer section tacked onto some completely different alien ship.
In another post, I tried to guess how a redesign of the Enterprise might equate to the modern trend of doing design updates of classic cars. As it turns out, I think my 1960s to 21st century Camaro comparison turned out to be the closest in design ideology:
Classic Camaro
Modern Camaro
At the time I wrote:
“Let me say that I think the new Camaro is really, REALLY hot and from a design standpoint pays homage to the classic version, but that degree of change for the Enterprise would be completely unacceptable.”
Oh well.
Or… is it just me? Do I need to give it time to sink in and see it in action? I’d like to hear opinions from both Star Trek fans and non-fans.
[UPDATE: Thanks to "Spockboy" check out this minor change to the design via Photoshop that makes the new NCC-1701 look FAR better by adding some bulk to the lower part of the ship.]
Star Trek opens on May 8, 2009.
Source: EW.com via FirstShowing.net
Around the web:
Loading ...
Agreed that the time travel theme has been done to death in ST, and I hope it gets a long and well-deserved rest after this, along with Klingons, Romulans, and the Mirror Universe (even if I’d love to see more of Zoe)
Going back in time is a mental mastrubatory loser empowerment fantasy that is at it’s core based on regret. As much as we would like to live without any regrets, they are a part of what makes us what we are. Although I may cringe thinking about what a dork I was in High School, it is that regret that drives me to be less of a dork today. “I want my pain! I need my pain!”
You’d better have a good reason to go back in time and change history, you’d better have wrong to right that affects more than you. The great historical wrong that Paramount is trying to right with this movie is NBC’s 1969 cancellation of Star Trek.
The original crew, with all of their human faults, were much more interesting and compelling to watch than the stodgy stiffs of later generations with their PC “Evolved sensibility”
By the time of the movies, FX had advanced to a convincing level but the cast had lost their original fire. (ST5 Uhura fan dance sequence anyone?, Talk about raping my memories!)
Maybe, just maybe we can get it all to fall back into place this time.
@ Brighteyes:
“You’d better have a good reason to go back in time and change history, you’d better have wrong to right that affects more than you.”
Brother, you got that right!
I have often speculated, the ‘every-time-you-go-back-you-create-a-brand-new-timeline’ arguement notwithstanding, what would happen if you actually could physically go back to Munich in 1933, and assassinate Adolf Hitler.
There you are, right at the perfect spot as Der Fuhrher, Rudolf Hess, and General von Ludendorf come marching up the strasse, with your Mannlicher/Carcano rifle (not all that much of a stretch, really, since the company was in business, in Italy, decades before Lee Harvey Oswald ordered one from Dallas), and you manage to draw down on a perfect bead right between young Schicklegrube’s eyes, causing a nice, fist-sized crater in the back of his head; you make it back to your time machine, or beam up to your ship, or whatever, thinking that you have, surely, saved 6 million Jews (and almost 50 million others), and no matter how things turn out, now, it has to be better than the worst war in human history…right?
Wrong. Without the spur of warfare, whatever purchase that came from America’s participation in the Great War is squandered, because there is no vehicle to launch the US onto the world stage, to stay; worse, without the strain of the ‘Great Patriotic War’, the Russians’ name for the WWII conflict, Stalin stays in power, solidifying his position as the Master of Socialism, and living perhaps far longer than 1953.
Eventually, without a war-footing based United States Navy to control and contain them, the Imperial Japanese Navy has the run of the whole Pacific basin, and pushes us back all the way to the west coast, so they never feel the need to take out Pearl Harbor, or if they do, this time they get all our carriers, effectively defanging our navy.
Eventually, with the help of the two Werners (Braun & Heisenberg), the Soviets eventually develop the atomic bomb, mate nuke warheads to ICBMs, and dominate the world – which is now called The UGSR, the Union of Global Soviet Republics, eventually covering more territory than the former (now dead) British Empire. Including the United States of America.
And you thought you were so smart!
Here’s another one: While flying B-17s over Germany – if Hitler isn’t killed – Gene Roddenberry is shot down, and dies along with his entire crew. He never becomes a cop in LA, never starts producing TV series like ‘The Lieutenant’ (which starred Gary Lockwood, who later played Gary Mitchel in the ‘Where No Man Has Gone Before’ episode, and occasionally guest-starred Nichelle Nichols), and never dreams up & produces Star Trek, and we all something else to do with our now ordinary, boring, totally meaningless lives…talk about telling people to ‘get a life’!
This is no doubt why they came up with the concept of the ‘Temporal Prime Directive’, don’t you think?
JOHN
I am unsure if Johnny-O is being sarcastic of if he is serious. Nonetheless, notwithstanding the above, what I find really annoying with the altered time line/reality schtick is that it is completely and totally unnecessary. The best of all the ST movies is without a doubt ST2 “Wrath of Khan”. The second best (in my ever to be humble opinion) was The Undiscovered Country. No alternate time line crap in either. Surely the scriptwriters at Paramount can do better. In fact, if they’re so desparate for ideas, why not take one of the countless Star Trek novels and turn one of them into a movie (as if no one has ever turned a book into a movie before)–just leave out the ones involving time/alternate universe travel. In my youth, I read many, many of said novels. If they wanted to do a pre-quel, how about “Enterprise – The First Mission” with Captain Robert April. Believe it or not, this novel has become accepted history by Paramount. If any of you have the cutaway poster of the “Enterprise D”, you will notice in one of the bottom corners silhouettes of all the former Enterprises beginning with NCC-1701. Each one has a list of Captains for the ship. For the original Enterprise, Captain Robert April is considered to the authentic first captain of the Enterprise.
Just a thought.
@ Purist, et al:
I was being perhaps a little sarastic, Purist, but not at you. As a matter of fact, I happen to agree with you – the alternate timeline theme has been done to death (Terminator, Terminator, Terminator….ARRRGGGHHH!), like the others have said, and as engaging as it can be, it is just absolutely MADDENING! Unfortunatately, science fiction is the only medium for this, but I am like you, I loved ST II & VI, but I also loved ST IV, the ‘Voyage Home’; they saved their world by abducting a pair of humpback whales from ours, and the only timeline incursion they had to risk was, after all, introducing Mr Nichols to the wonders of transparent aluminum, pretty cool stuff I am sure someone out there is now working on…but you’re right, the fan novels are excellent, and in fact I have heard of ‘Enterprise – The First Mission’, but I would love to see who they get to play Captain Robert April – they did a fine job of casting Bruce Greenwood as Captain Christopher Pike (he’s no Jeffery Hunter, but then again, who is?).
Anyway, I think you and the others represent the core of what Star Trek – Roddenberry’s Star Trek – was supposed to be all about, a whole universe that fires the imaginations of the fans; and yes, it’s the Enterprise, but it is also the other ships and people of Starfleet – like the other 3 series proved, if you ask me. Do you recall the names of the original 12 ‘Connies’, remember? I used to be able to riddle them right off the top of my head, but it has been so long, and other names have taken their place, thanks to less skilled authors who weren’t paying attention, no thanks! Amateurs…
I, like you, would love to see good, entertaining science fiction, devoid of any time-travel stories – but then, how are you gonna break Hollywood of doing the lazy thing they do anyway, by making more sequels? They already have a crippling lack of imagination as it is, and it isn’t just Paramount.
Good thing Star Trek thrives on sequels, huh, lol?
Lemme see, Constitution, Enterprise, Exeter, Lexington, Yorktown, Hood, Kongo, Potempkin, Intrepid, Defiant, Excalibur, and…was it Saratoga?
I used to have this down, am I missing any of them? I don’t think it was Saratoga…
Anyway, all sarcasm aside, we should really tell Paramount what for, just like the fans did NBC, and they brought back STTOS back from the edge of oblivion. That would show ‘em!
I’m serious, they need to know how we feel. Anybody game? They already have a framework now, with this new movie.
Just a thought, JOHN
Hi John,
Yes, you missed one. The USS Constellation. It was destroyed in The Doomsday Machine following the death of Commodore Decker (who, btw, just happens to be the father of Will Decker – the Captain of the re-fitted Enterprise in ST: The Motion Picture (but that’s another story).
Just FYI. You mentioned you had heard of the novel “Enterprise: The First Mission” Here’s the briefest of overviews. See if you think it might be a good starting point for a movie.
Essentially, the movie is more about Kirk’s father than Captain April. The Enterprise is not fully completed but is spaceworthy. No markings yet and sections of the inside are not yet built (mostly crew quarters). April’s orders are to take the ship on an initial shakedown run (presumably to test the engines). It has only a skeleton crew.
Unbeknownst to everyone, a traitor is onboard. While the Enterprise is going through it’s paces, the traitor initiates a navigational malfunction causing the ship to be thrown deep into Romulan space. Since (at this point in history) the Enterprise represents the cutting edge of Starfleet technology. Captain April orders ship to make it back to Federation space before the Romulans get to it first. Remember, a Federation ship with no markings would be considered a spy ship and thus risk war between the Federation and the Romulans.
This is where my memory gets a bit unsure. While making its way back home, April has to employ several tactics to overcome various obstacles – not the least of which is finding the traitor. This is where Kirk’s father (Samual isn’t it?) come in since he is Acting Security Chief.
When the Enterprise gets close to Federation space, April employs a deception to fool the Romulans. He sends fake transmissions which gives a false location of the ship. Of course, the Romulans would be able to determine the absence of ship in that location in short order. So, April. in the fake transmission, speaks of a device which make the ship invisible to sensors and sight.
The Romulans, believing that since the Federation had such a device, it must also have superior military technology and set out to develop their own “cloaking device” before engaging in any conflict with the Federation.
Of course, the traitor is found, and the Enterprise makes it home.
Oh yeah, James T. Kirk is also aboard since his dad was showing him the ship when all this went down. However, at this time, Jimmy Kirk is a snot-nosed whiny teenager (although he does some growing up along the way).
If I made mistakes anywhere, feel free to correct me. As I said, I read this quite awhile ago.
Well, whaddya think? I don’t know about you guys, but to me it would make for very good movie.
Johnny-O – As far as letting Paramount know our dissatisfaction – where do I sign up?
@ Purist:
YEEEEESSSS! The Constellation, how could I ever forget that one???!!! What is wrong with ME???
Thank you, Purist, thank you so much! The little gray cells, as Belgian PI Hercule Poirot would’ve said (Agatha Christie, forgive my digression), really let me down…
Of course, it all comes back now; Captain Matt Decker (father of Capt Will Decker, who wound up, along with the beautiful Deltan woman Iliea, becoming integrated with V’Ger in STTMP), was her commmander! I can’t believe I forgot, not the least because in the real world, the actual Constellation was a sort of sister supercarrier to the real-world Enterprise (CVN-65), launched at about the same time, and although the Big E is in a class by herself (literally) and has no other sisters, and the Connie is deisel powered (like at least 4 other supercarriers built after – they were cheaper), she is commonly paired to the world’s first nuclear supercarrier; so they already had an shared history.
Yes, I remember holding the paperback ‘Enterprise – The First Mission’ in my hands, my God, it must’ve been twenty or more years ago, and reading all the squibs on the front & back! I wish I’d bought it, not surprised it was such a compelling story, by your accounting (good job, btw!). I notice, lol, you are already referring to it as a ‘movie’ – I like your optimistic attitude, hahaha! And yes, I remember clearly that the elder Kirk was named George Samuel Kirk, and in fact as I recall, young Tiberius had an older brother, named after his dad, George Samuel, Jr. Only Jim called him Sam (‘What are Little Girls Made Of?’ – first season, TOS) Also, Kirk’s nephew showed up later, I forget the name of the episode, but it was the one where the Enterprise crew went to Deneb IV, a Fed Colony where Sam & family had moved to; the population was wiped out by these huge flying brain cells, who glommed onto the back of one’s neck, and eventually drove the victim insane – anybody help my flagging memory out, once again, on the title? Sorry! Anyway, Kirk’s nephew was the sole suvivor, so I guess George the Younger (Sam) and his wife didn’t make it, and as I recall, Spock got infected himself and was able to keep it together, as he was a Vulcan & had more mental discipline, and so tried to discover what if anything could kill these damn things, finally divining that a wavelength of light was their Achille’s Heel – and almost became blind in the process, sort of a preview of what he would do, almost twenty years later, in the Mutara Nebula, sacrificing his life for his crew…
I like your precis of the plot, it reminds me a similar situation from actual history: Ronald Reagan managed to convince the Soviets that we had Star Wars weapons (SDI Program, remember), and so caused them to spend such a huge percentage of their GNP that it caused the Soviet system to collapse, bringing the age of communism, at least in Russia, to a close; in this case, Captain April’s little ruse was the inspiration for the Romulan’s obsession with cloaking devices, which became their trademark…I LOVE IT!!! It has the ring of truth to it, and I wonder how many other things in history are the result of such delberate deception? Like Kruschev and his 9 missles, all the time bragging about how Russia would crank out ICBMs ‘like sausages’, thereby forcing us to mainline miniturization & solid rocket fuel for the new missile sub George Washington…it makes you wonder, doesn’t it?
As for a young ‘Jimmy Kirk’ (you sound like Finnegan, lol! “Ahhh, Jimmy boy!”), running around the unfinished corridors of the Enterprise & freaking out, being forced to grow up a little early, all I can say is, Is it any wonder he was a snot-nosed, whiny teenager? Don’t such kids usually grow up to be great men – if they are tested early? I have observed this myself, and it is true, like someone once said about Anniken Skywalker growing up to be Darth Vader – of COURSE he was an overly whiny Emo kid, with issues, those are the type who wind up making history, right???
And Purist, I wish I knew where to sign up, but if you think about it, the folks who started the letter-writing campaign which eventually resurrected STTOS didn’t know what they were doin’ either, at first, did they? All they did was bury the NBC mailroom in mailbags. We start with an addrees, I guess, and nowadays, we have emails we can bombard the Paramount offices with, too…sooner or later, they have to notice! Right?
I never thought I would be an organizer, when I woke up this morning…oh well, glad for your interest, what do YOU think?
Do we have a chance? It IS for a good cause, after all, and after the movie premiers, we’ll have the imput from a lot of new fans.
Ready for the Revolution, JOHN
(hahaha!)
Hello, Johnny-O
After rooting around a bit on the Paramount website, I found good news and bad news.
The good news is finding Paramount’s mailing address:
Paramount Pictures Corporation
5555 Melrose Ave.,
Ste 121
Hollywood, CA
90038
The bad news is that they state that unsolicited scripts and storylines will be destroyed without being read.
However, that being said, technically, what we have been discussing isn’t actually either. It’s a story that they already have and approved (remember Paramout loves to slap its logo all over the books).
It was earlier posited “Who would we get to play the part of Captain Robert April?
I’ve given it some thought. The image generated in my mind whilst reading the book was that of a stocky man with a well-groomed beard. He wears a turtleneck sweater as opposed to a regulation uniform. If I remember correctly (after 20 years–yikes, am I really that old?), he prefers to smoke a pipe. Further, he has the ability to remain (almost Britishly) calm under extremely dangerous situations.
Therefore, my candidate for the part (although he’s far too old for it now) was Sean Connery. Is there a Sean Connery-like actor out there these days?
(but I digress)
There are several reasons for my affection for Enterprise:The First Mission.
1. No Time Travel
2. It nicely follows accepted and approved Star Trek history
3. No Time Travel
4. It would make a great sequel to the movie coming out.
5. No Time Travel.
6. There is no Reason 6
7. No Time Travel
(LOL) – my apologies to Monty Python.
Anyway, what I’m really interested in is what EVERYONE reading this discussion thinks of the idea. So, before Johnny-o and I start a letter writing campaign, it would be nice to know that there is support for the notion.
Let’s have an informal vote. So, everyone, what do YOU think?
@ Purist (and for the record):
Purist, m’friend, my only possible vote, predictable as it may be is: “Aye, Captain, lessee if these bloody Kingons – uh, I mean, Paramount Studios, has the belly for it!”
As for Robert April, if you want a Brit, why not someone who just happened to play James Bond, an Irishman who I know damn well I saw smoking a pipe in a turtleneck (black, right? Has to be!) in one of his other movies, either Lawnmower Man, Dante’s Peak, or Powers of Attraction – Pierce Brosnan? Granted he isn’t stocky, but maybe if the script calls for it, he might bulk up a little – it would make him look a bit older, too. He probably already has graying hair. Jeez, he can have some of mine…
Speaking of age, if you’re anywhere near my age (do you remember TOS episodes in prime time? I do), Yes, you really are that old, Hahahaha! Sorry, had to be said!
As for young Jimmy Kirk (kinda growin’ on me, that one) they could use Zac Efron, he’s a little too handsome and not that much younger than Chris Pine, who I’m also very impressed with, but what the hell, all the Brat Packers’ve grown up.
And as to Monty Python, like Eric Palin sang in the Life of Brian, “Always look on the briii-iiight side of liiife…” I loved the Flying Circus too, so now, for something completely different…just no more dead parrots, lol!
Will copy/paste the Paramount address in my Notepad section, thanx. Somewhere on here, I think I saw someone’s posting of their email address, too, not that that can’t be found, easily enough.
I only have one request: That the Enterpise design they use, if we can get them to do this movie, is the one on the link that NCC-174 was good enough to put up – it’s excellent, a bit prettyed up as we might expect a movie Starship Enterprise to be, but hell, it even lends itself to the ‘not-quite-finished’ look as it is, check it out. You’ll like it! If we are a loud enough squeaky wheel, we can pull this off, and what better inspiration can there be than the original, series-saving fans? It can happen again, and like I said a while back, this time around, Star Trek will be hip, the fans will take it back into their hearts, and…it might even make a lot of money! Jesus, I hadn’t thought of that…
Regards, JOHN
NEXT!
Purist, from memory, like you, I think most of your synopsis for Enterprise: The First Mission is correct, but my memory is that the teenage James T appeared in a subsequent adventure of Captain April and George Samuel Kirk on board a newly commissioned USS Enterprise, linked to events happening just after ST6. I can’t remember the title of that one tho’, sorry.
I’ll suspend judgment on the ‘new original’ Enterprise ’til I’ve seen the film.
atseyes, the book that you are are thinking of is “Best Destiny”.
@ Atseyes & Jake (& by extension, Purist):
Well, why not combine the two novels? It’s called a ‘composite plot’, and it has been done before, as a matter of fact, it sounds very inovative to me.
The prospect of a shotgun ‘growing up a little early’ plotline for teen Jim Kirk, combined with the origins of the Romulans’ fixation on cloaking shields, to me is just too hard to resist, and it would play, I think, very well -
‘Enterprise – Best Destiny’
Whaddya think?
Don’t get mad (lol),
JOHN
I agree with everyone on the new designed, and I also understand what Abrams was trying to accomplish with this designed. I will wait and see how he pulls it off in the film, and since Paramount has given Abrams the green light on a second Trek (concept unknown at this point), we’ll just have to see how it plays out.
It’s been a while since I’ve visited this site and reviewed comments about the next installment of Star Trek. From what I’ve read there have been a variety of cynics as well as those who are willing to give the movie a chance before posting judement. Well, I’d like to ad the following thoughts.
How did the general consumer audience respond to Star Trek when it first aired back in the mid 60′s and what was going on in society that influenced views and perspectives? We were going through the hight of the Vietnam Conflict, the Civil Rights Movement and there was by all accounts a general rebellion against conservative views and culture by many youth (Wood Stock etc.). And yet, The Original Star Trek aired it’s first episode in 1966 and didn’t make it out of the 60′s. So what was it about Star Trek that was so great back then?
I do consider myself a loyal Star Trek Fan and appreciated the many versions of it’s story lines within the each owns context (Emphasis on each owns context).
Bottomline, I believe Star Trek needs a different vision for different times. I read excerpts on this site about Gary Mitchell, Finnegan and other characters who were recognized in classic trek.
Candidly, to learn more about the birth of James T. Kirk, the history behind his fathers service in StarFleet, understanding the Origins behind Kirks need to spit in deaths face. All this was offered in just a few clips that have been released and NO ONE THINKS THAT THIS HAS ANY SIGNIFICANCE?
I said this before in a posting back in the Fall of 2008, you can’t view this Version of Star Trek in a cookie cutter comparison to classic trek or you’ll most likely be disappointed. Throw away the classic trek glasses and look at the movie within it’s own context. This Movie Appears to be taking Trek in a direction “No One Has Gone Before” and if Trek is to remain True to its Slogan, ISN’T THAT THE POINT?
@ Larry:
You’re not wrong.
I get what you are saying; in other words, if we all just try to look at the new JJ Abrams ST movie with fresh eyes, just like we all did (those of us old enough to remember) when STTOS first aired back in the fall of 1966, we can appreciate it’s true significance. I agree, as far as it goes, and so do most of the people on this thread, who have said they are willing to give the film a chance, reserving judgement until they have seen it before going OFF on it (anyone remember the protesters against Scorcesee’s ‘Last Temptation of Christ’?), like me, Purist, and anyone else we can rope into a letter-writing campaign (lol!). We just discussed doing exactly that.
In a way, this has been a problem, the TOS, the original Enterprise, the fans…I have been thinking about this for quite sometime, ever since seeing ST9/’Insurrection’, and it hit me I had just pissed away my $10. Star Trek has become a victim of its own success, when U think about it. Many of us original fans, so taken with the brilliant design of the Enterprise and the technology of warp-era spaceflight, had never heard the word ‘starship’ used before, and this program added it to our common lexicon. It was pivotal, especially the devotion Roddenberry had to technical & scientific accuracy, as far as possible. As you said, at a time when the Vietnam conflict was at it’s height, civil rights issues were reshaping America (and the world, as in South Africa), Woodstock & the hippie movement forced people to redefine modern values, and even our space program was flagging, fatally (remember the Apollo 1 fire on Pad 39A?), there was this one intelligent, rather cool TV program submitted for our approval every Thursday night, showing us people dissolving into silvery clouds, humans working and living with aliens onstead of just shooting them, and one man, Jame T Kirk, with the authority of his whole society, reperesenting literally the whole human race, with all of our faults, making a statement about the worthiness and the survivability of Mankind.
The fans, in a way, became almost disciples, and have not taken kindly, down through the years, to ecclesiastical revisionism of such touchstobes as the Enterprise (B, D, E, Voyager, DS-9) the captains (Kirk vs Picard, vs Sisko, vs Janeway, even Archer – especially Archer), or even the style (two-fisted cowboy diplomacy vs political correctness); although it should be noted, as you say, that in every single case, the original intent was engaged – whether it worked, commercially, or not. My God, $134 for a pre-painted, pre-decalled NX-01 Enterprise model? Are they kidding me? But I digress…
My point is this: It is one thing to say, for example, that Jesus Christ was crucified on a rude Roman cross; it something completely off the WALL to suggest that His cross was something fashioned in Norm Abram’s New Yankee Workshop. There IS a reason, you see, it is called a CANON. Any Apocrypha may strain the original Gospel, but it cannot break it. The Enterprise did NOT look like that. The anthologies of the crew, from Kirk onward, did NOT begin and progress that way.
Having said that, we are all aware, due to leaked press releases, that the plot involves a timetravel-distorted timeline storyline, and that all we see before us is probably a one-off story as far as the established histories are concerned. All that is just fine, as far as it goes;
The only bitch is that Abrams used the old timetravel-distorted altered-timeline-our-heroes-have-to-go-back-&- correct, as Purist so aptly put it, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, it’s been done to the point of an Abbot & Costello farce! A timeline scenario? Can’t they do any better than that???
Your point is fine, as far as it goes, and the fans can be, well, fanatical – that IS where the word FAN comes from, U know – and we should all enjoy this new incarnation of the Star Trek icon, new & old fans alike, with fresh eyes, mindful of the fact that, like it or not, the ‘Franchise’, as they call it, sorely needs a shot in the arm, and all that we survey on May 8th (I’m gonna be there, aren’t you?) is subject to the vissicitudes of Hollywood, commercial or otherwise.
All I am saying is, For the Love of God, no more time travel stories, PUH-LEASE!
Beyond that, you have an excellent point. Which is a little, I suppose, like asking Mary Todd Lincoln “Aside from what happened, how did yon like the play?”
JOHN
Nicely stated John. I just had an interesting thought (and Larry might take an interest in it as well). With all the criticism aimed at the alleged plot of the new movie, it occured to me that we might actually be able to enjoy the movie.
Take note, I am NOT taking back anything I stated, and what I said above still stands (firmly, I might add).
Rather, if we go to this movie, expecting disappointment, and it turns out to be a little better than what we expected, we might think it wasn’t all that bad.
Let me give an example. When Transformers originally came out, it didn’t do very well at the box office (at least not where I am). When I finally decided to watch it on DVD (I was off sick from work one day and decided to veg on the couch and watch a movie to take my mind off how crappy I felt), I turned of the DVD player expecting campy, trashy toys running around with hokey special effects (i.e. a re-vamped kid’s Saturday morning cartoon). Boy, was I wrong! It was a really good movie. Now, because I had gone into it expecting crap, it (to me at the time) became an awesome movie.
In short, aim low and avoid disappointment. If we go to the movie with low expectations, we may find ourselved overlooking some of the negatives and concentrating on the positives. (Who knew that basic psychology course I took would come in handy?).
In any event, John, you are quite right. This is NOT the Enterprise we know and love. From the trailers I’ve seen, however, it does look like they got one thing right. From all appearance, the uniforms do look like the originals (granted the time given to look at them had been somewhat limited).
For the record, I am willing to give the movie a chance. I think we should afford the people who created it that much. Maybe.
@ Purist:
“In short, aim low and avoid disappointment. If we go to the movie with low expectations, we may find ourselved overlooking some of the negatives and concentrating on the positives.”
You said a mouthful, pal. As usual, you’ve crystallized in a few lines what I took paragraphs to pedantically drone on about.
The benefit of lowered expectaitons, exactly. I had to admit, I thought Abram’s ‘Transformers’ was cool, appealling to the child in me (all those Matchbox cars I had – don’t even remember what happened to them, probably worth a young fortune on eBay, now!); but at the end of the movie, as Shia Lebeuf & his girlfriend watched a sunset, I have to admit to a certain misty-eyed lump in my throat, hearing the voice-over of the leader truck-bot promising that “As long as the Human Race suvives, we will be there, watching over them…”, or words to that effect, and I felt like I had spent a good ten dollars that night.
Which, nowadays, is about all the best one can hope for.
Btw, the uniforms do look pretty cool – did U notice, in the closeups, they seem to be made of some kind of honeycomb structure – maybe, the thought occurs, like a sort of isotometric tunic made by someone like Isotoner? It would make sense, in the technology of the 23rd Century, to make clothes that keep long-duration crewmembers’ muscles in shape with every movement. Take a really close look, the gold ones are the easiest to see.
JOHN
Btw,
Someone in this thread made some rather disparaging comments about the beautiful (perhaps TOO beautiful) Ent-E, the Soveriegn class, “with all of it’s black panels”…while I champion the right of such people to make such comments (after all, how are we gonna know how you feel if you don’t sing out, right?), and agree that the Soveriegn is WAAAY too sleeker than it needs to be to be a, uh, SPACEship, which travels in a vacuum, there are a couple of things I would like to make everyone aware of:
First of all, I can’t imagine why ANYBODY would dislike the Sovereign, it’s just so beautiful, for Heaven’s sake, the shipboard profile looks like a cloud, with no noticable separation plane between the Command Saucer & the Stardrive Section, although presumably there is one; since the Auto-Sep feature was proven as a concept with the Galazy class (I am referring not only to the common capability to separate one hull from another with explosive bolts, as in such emergency situations as using one or the other hulls for a space lifeboat, but is a rendezvous & re-docking scenario involving both sections without the need of a starbase or such other repair facilities as a Pearl class frontline-capable mobile facility), unlikely they would would drop it as part of a package.
Second, I admit that the Sovereign is obviously a product of the Pininfarina Branch of the Starfleet Design Bureau (lol), and does in fact give every appearance of being designed, quite honestly, to look F***ING COOL on a T-shirt, all that granted, no argument; however, there are a couple of points peoiple need to be made aware of:
In that particular Starfleet Technical Manual with the shop drawings of the Galaxy class all over the front & back (released in the early 90s, if I’m not mistaken – Vic, I think you mentioned you have one, correct?), there is a page that explains, very satisfactorily, why a starship needs to be as sleek & streamlined as possible for the sake of maximum efficiency. This also may explain, by the way, the near abscence of any stern keel in the new movie’s Enterprise, much as I dislike it, I must admit, the squashed look makes sense by these lights.
Remember the old, pre-TOS Daedalus class? Also, very similar to the lost Horizon/Valiant/Essex ships? Captain Sisko had a model of one in his office on Deep Space Nine. They were characterized by a spherical Command Section, squared-off Engineering Section & warp nacelles, even the interconnecting dorsal, such as it was, was just a tube; the spherical command hull idea survived into the near-future (‘All Good Things’, ST/TNG) with the Olymipic class medical frigate (such as Capt/Dr Beverly Picard’s ship USS Pasteur) but all others, almost without exception, morphed into vessels comprised of saucers & more shaply-turned hulls & nacelles.
Well, the reason for starship streamlining, according to this page, had to do with the warp field geometry summed up as the ‘lobes’ surrounding the two basic hulls or hull groupings comprising most Starfleet vessels. This was the logical reason for the ‘cove’, the scooped-out area under the fantail of every heavy cruiser, to my knowledge, from the ‘Connies’ forward. The old Daedalus and her early sisters, I imagine, had a similar problem as the first experimental delta-winged jets at Muroc (Edwards, now) Air Force Base, post-war, which could not break Mach 1 until someone discovered the aerodynamics of ‘area rule’ – they were inefficient as hell, burning up huge quantities of antimatter (or maybe going through dilitium crystals like there was no tomorrow, take your pick); lacking the software that would come along later, the whitecoats back in SanFran realized all they had to do was make room for the overlap of the lobes which struggled to pull the vessel through the stresses of travelling through hyperspace. This was an easy fix – just lop off any part of the vessel that jutted out beyond the edge of the field itself, hence, the origin of the cove.
With every new design, generation to generation, the refinement became more pronounced. I struggle to concieve how much more sleek starships of, say, the 25th Century will become; possibly Captain Braxton’s USS Relativity, from the 29th Century (ST/Voyager, several episodes – there we go with time travel again!), may give us an indication.
My point is, as much as I may respect the opinion of anyone as to a design such as the Sovereign being ‘too pretty’ – or, for that matter, to the extolling of the virtues of John Jefferies original ‘perfect design’ of the TOS Enterprise (my aunt Tilly’s little black moustache! The original ship had unimaginative warp nacelles, too-spindly warp pylons, and an overall styling which, compared to the Refit, can only be described as BAROQUE!), there appear to be very good, locical, well thought-out reasons for the choices the ST Franchise folks have made through the years.
Having said that, there IS no accounting for taste. Most people seem to like the Refit/Ent-A design the most, and I must agree, I just love the the delicate yet powerful beauty and stateliness of the Refit, no question about it (it might be interesting to discover, officially, which of the Enterprise designs seems to be the most popular, if that hasn’t been done already), but the Sovereign is, in my heart of hearts, well, sovereign. They made the best design ever, in my opinion, and I just wish they could put it in some half-assed decent movies now…it probably won’t happen. That ship has, to coin a phrase, sailed.
Well, I feel better. To each his/her own, as they say.
JOHN
Johnny’s “Lincoln” reference brings to mind a classic Twilight Zone ep that may help explain the paradoxes at work here.
Our protagonist finds himself transported back in time to the eve of Lincoln’s assassination, but finds himself repeatedly thwarted in his attempts to prevent it. Returning to the present, he thinks that nothing has changed until he finds that the former doorman at his social club is now a member in good standing and a scion of “one of the oldest and wealthiest families in the city.”
Details of history can be altered, but there are landmarks in the timescape that remain immutable and tend to dampen the butterfly effect. Like his hero Abraham Lincoln, Kirk is one such figure.
Even the mighty Narada, who’s incursion turned Kirk from the “grim bookworm” that his father raised him to be into a joyriding aimless drifter, couldn’t do it.
The original “sagging old rust bucket” that had already sailed under two captains before Kirk commanded her, was never built. Instead Star Fleet delayed her construction and changed her design to make her more battle worthy and incorporate tech gleaned from Narada.
They also de-centralized their shipbuilding facilities to avoid having all of their eggs in one Bay Area basket. One such facility was built in Riverside Iowa, Kirk’s hometown.
While Nero may have prevented Kirk from going to the Enterprise, he caused Star Fleet to bring the Enterprise to Kirk.
One can imagine that even in the Time Line where the good intentioned Edith Keeler inadvertently causes the Allies to lose the Second World War, there is still a Space Nazi Kirk and Spock seig heiling their way through the cosmos (played by Jewish actors of course, LOL)
@ Brighteyes:
HAHAHAHA! Brighteyes, U are okay in my book, buddy, I like your mind!…if that doesn’t sound too much like a man-crush (“NOT THAT THERE’S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT!” – Jerry Seinfeld), lol!
Yes, I rememmber that Zone episode, I loved that, and you make an excellent point, I was trying to say that in my rather glum speculation of transporting back in time with a Mannlicher/Carcano rifle to assassinate Hitler in Munich; you also mentioned the Butterfly Effect, which was a truly mind-blowing (no, REALLY) movie starring Ashton Kutcher. No matter what you do, you can’t prevent history, only make it more interesting. I was wondering how Kirk managed to ride his vintage motercycle all the way to Mare Island…
Btw, wasn’t the Mirror Universe, with its ‘Federation’ sybolized by an Earth with a dagger through it, essentially the same thing as a global National Socialist (call it ‘Global Socialist’) government? Even so, say what you want to, Uhura sure looked hot running around in a midriff, didn’t she? Lol!
And I’d be really careful what you call a ‘sagging old rustbucket’, pal, Scotty might pop up right in front of you, and show you the fury of an insulted Scotsman, lol! If he was willing to take on a roomful of bellicose Klingons (‘The Trouble With Tribbles’), what chance do you have? He’ll kick yer ASS! (Not that I can’t get next to that.)
“Captain, they called the Enterprise a GARBAGE SCOW…”
Them’s fightin’ words, U know, Hahahaha!
Thanx for the clarification on the movie, I really appreciate it!
JOHN
Referring back to the Book of the Enterprise’s First mission, it was called Star Trek: FInal Fronter by Diane Carey. James T. Krik was never on board her in this book, but in Best Destiny he was at the age of 16.
Now as per the new look of Enterprise, she’s starting to grow on me. The website has a panaromic view of the bridge. I like the look. It keeps some of the same elements of the original, plus some new ideas. I’m looking forward to seeing the movie and hope it takes off.
@ DJ BBS:
Not calling you a liar, m’friend, but I am certain the book I almost bought was called ‘Enterprise: The First Mission’, or at least it had the word Enterprise in it, plus the squibs on the front & back decribed a revealing conversation between Robert April & George Samuel Kirk, with the Enterprise floating in spacedock in the background…Hmmm, we may be talking about three fan novels here…
In any case, I still don’t see why, just because Purist unknowingly combined the two (or three) novels in his head, it wouldn’t play on film. Both stories sound good, and even though I’ve read some real fireplace-tender among the fan novels, some were top-notch, and really captured the spirit of the original Trek.
My God, ‘Spock Must Die!’ was only fit for toilet paper!But the one about McCoy as a prisoner of the Romulans was excellent – as was, believe it or not (as someone else mentioned in a related thread on here), the TNG fan novel combining the crew of the Enterprise-D with the X-Men – I never thought I would, but I loved it! There was also the one about Captain McKenzie Calhoun (portrayed on the cover as Alec Baldwin, that would be interesting…), commander of the refit Ambassador II-class starship USS Excalibur, whose crew also included such characters from TNG (guests or repeating guest stars) as originally played by Elizabeth Dennehy (the cliffhanger 2-parter in which Picard was assimilated by the Borg) and Lt Robin Loefler, repeatedly played on TNG by a very young Ashley Judd…I believe Wesley Crusher was also part of Calhoun’s crew, as well. That one was a nice change.
Hope I didn’t get anybody’s nose bent outta joint, but really, there is a LOT of talent out there!
JOHN
Actually, John, DJ BBS is absolutely correct. I just checked the Star Book library, the book is titled Final Frontier. Full points to DJ.
In your defense however, there is also a book called “Enterprise; The First Adventure” featuring a brand new captain named Kirk, a first officer named Spock who (initially thinks Kirk is a ditz and a relatively new crew). Not a bad read actually.
You’re definitely right about some novels being bird cage carpeting. I sometimes wondered if some of the authors even saw the show.
You’re also (I believe) that the storyline would still work (what’s in a title, after all). Another reason I like it (in addition to the ones already mentioned) is the Paramount would not have to worry about finding actors to ressurect old characters. No Spock to worry about, no Kirk, no Sulu, no one. they could start fresh with new faces and a new crew. Wow, if they wanted, they could use it as a launch point for a new series (just no time travel please!)
@ Purist: Thanx, pal. I appreciate it.
@ DJ BBS: Sorry I ever doubted ya, DJ. But it looks like from what Purist tells me, “zee lit-tle grey cells” have not completely failed me yet, lol. Knew I saw that title somewhere!
It’s amazing to me, guys, how the human memory (can’t answer for Vulcans) can mix, obfuscate, re-combine, and sometimes invent out of whole cloth (sometimes just on a suggestion) things that NEVER HAPPENED, but what a relief! Who hasn’t been willing to swear on a Bible, even, that Humprey Bogart told Dooley Wilson to “Play it again, Sam”? The real line was “Play it again! You played it for her, you can play it for me!” Oh, well…
You know, P, I had the same exact thought as you, what a shame if they DON’T ‘keep the band together’, and only make a sequel or two, if they pass on a new series? I mean, where’re they gonna find a better Spock than Zack Quinto?
Go, Sylar!
As to whether they really will, or not, I guess it all comes down to money – remember the immortal words of The Swartz (Mel Brooks): “Moichendising, moichendising, moichendising!”
Btw, I just remembered the question I keep forgetting:
Can any of you please tell me, what is the origin, canon-wise, of the meaning of the Starfleet arrowhead? I know it was the symbol of the Enterprise before it became the logo of Starfleet (just look at some of the old episodes from the first season – Decker of the Constellation, Tracey of the Exeter), and by the time of the M-5 incident (‘The Ultimate Computer’, Percy Rodriguez as Dr Richard Daystrom), Captain Wesley of the Lexington had a flashy arrowhead on the left breast, just like the series regulars.
But what, if anything, was the idea of the arrowhead itself, anybody know? A friend, not that much of a Trek fan, once asked me “Isn’t that already a military badge or something?” I had to agree that a clovis arrowhead is the symbol of the modern US Cavalry, who traded in their horses for Hueys, (Air Cav, air mobile!), but that does not sound all that appropo for a fleet of starships.
Just curious. Anybody???
JOHN
The best I can give would be from one of the books so it’s definitely non-canonized (can’t remember the title). It’s supposedly the field create when matter and anti-matter create is a controlled environment using dilithium (i.e the warp field). Since (as DJ points out on the rant discussion) Starfleet was essentially create with the advent of warp power, it was adopted as ONE of the symbols for Starfleet personnel.
It was only after the Enterprise completed the 5 year mission (the only Connie to do so) that is was adopted by all Fleet vessels. Personally, I preferred the notion of different symbols for different ships. Just think, one could tell which ship you were from just by the uniform.
I was just thinking. If they did create a new series, one thing I would like to see is if an actor wishes to be written out of the show, instead of killing them off (i.e. Tasha Yar) just have them rotated to a new ship. Or perhaps, better yet, have regular personnel rotations like they do in present day. People get transferred to new ships all the time. I know this may also negatively affect the interpersonal dynamics of the show, but might work by introducing new blood every now and then. I hate to admit it (since I liked to original crew), but it is highly unlikely that a command crew for a ship would never change for… how many years was it- 10?
@ Purist:
Really? The warpfield? Hmmm, the ‘arrowhead’ (and I may be forgiven for thinking it WAS an arrowhead, I suppose, since even official source material has actually called it exactly that, inasmuch as it looks just like one) is actually the shape of the warp field when impacted by a tuned positive/contraterrene plasma stream? Fascinating!
I like that, P. Thank you so much, now I can sleep nights, hahaha! Seriously, that is a very satisfying explanation, and it also prompts me to wonder if there is a connection, based on the eccentric shape of the ‘notch’ (not a very stable alignment for a Clovis Point arrowhead), with the high, offset position of the warp nacelles (they are always usually either way high or down below, such as on the Reliant; even Voyager, which carried them level in a stored position, swung them up 45 degrees for warp travel, if you remember). I like that!
Could’ve sworn I saw it elsewhere other than on Enterprise crewmembers on some of the TOS episodes, but no matter, I just realized I can’t trust my memory anyway, as I will address in a related thread, in a minute. After the the five-year mission, heh? Cool.
I’m like you, the ‘arrowhead’ should be the symbol for just the Enterprise, not all of Starfleet, although that was in tribute to her, since she was, as you say, the only Connie to survive its mission – except for the Constitution herself, interestingly – I read somewhere, she was rarely if ever put into active service, spending most of her working life as a testbed (the most recent incarnation as a twin to the Big E’s refit, with the one exception that the warp nacelles, as on the later Constellation class – Picard’s old ship, decades later – were angled over 90 degrees and squared off toward the back, just like on Picard’s Stargazer), finally being turned into an orbital museum, ala Nautilus, Midway, Missouri, etc…whoops, I digressed again.
Anyway, I agree, it would be so hip to identify the ship just by the logo badge – esp later, when the badge would become a comm unit, replacing those clunky (!) flip-open communicators, hahaha! They called them ‘comm badges’.
As for crew rotation, I have something to share there, too: It has to do with an old episode of M*A*S*H – the one where an Army efficiency expert visited the 4077th, causing everyone to get their knickers in a twist over, U can just imagine, “Who’s gonna get shipped out? Who’s gonna stay? Who’s gonna be sent to THE FRONT??? AAAAACK!”
You get the idea. Turns out, the very fair-minded efficiency expert laid a bombshell on ‘em, in a good way: “We’d never break this bunch up,” he says, “the 4-oh-double-seven works like a Swiss watch, we could never replicate it again!”
Huge, collective sigh of relief. As you can just imagine. And, yes, people got killed (Henry), rotated (Burns, Trapper), and new ones took their place (Potter, Winchester, Hunnicutt), but a team is a team, and while the Army may be kinda dumb, even they’re not STUPID. Same thing goes for Starfleet, 300+ years later, Dr McCoy’s wise comments about the bureaucratic mind as a constant notwithstanding…What hath that to do, you may well ask, with yon Star Trek?
Simple – ALMOST THE EXACT SAME PLOT, right down to the same conclusion by the efficiency expert (in this case, a rather officioius, universially disliked young officer named Mr Merrick, as I recall), was played out scene for scene in ST/TNG, halfway through the series’ run! It is a common tactic with all shows requiring writers on television, and why not, what the hell, it works, right?
And in fact, you may recall, Worf, Chief Miles O’Brien, and O’Brien’s lovely civillian Japanese wife, Keiko, were all rotated in one move to Deep Space Nine, the former Cardassian space station Terek Nor, Cmdr Benjamin Sisko commanding.
But I get you, regular crew rotation would be more realistic – even though a team is a team, and Starfleet isn’t stupid…
Thanx again, P, about the arrowhead,
JOHN
One of the great joys of being a Trek fan is speculating about back story elements hinted at, but not explicitly stated.
This is not the first time starship design has been mucked with by temporal incursion “This is no time to talk about the time line, we don’t have the time!” I doubt, however we will re-visit Picard’s ready room, The Ent-A atrium, or rummage through Sisco’s old stuff to confirm my suspicions.
Even with no atmospheric resistance to overcome, the Area Rule still applies. warp envelopes, deflector shields, and structural integrity fields would all be most efficient on a ship with the minimal amount of surface area to internal volume, hence the streamlining.
Although a sphere is very good in this regard, as shown by Crusher’s hospital ship and the Dadelus class, it has one major weakness; it presents a big, fat target in combat.
The saucer configuration allows a captain to present a minimal target and scanner profile to an enemy while bringing the maximum amount of firepower to bear.
Johnny-O and I are likely brothers from other mothers, as I wrote that Edith Keeler’s meddling may have created the Mirror Universe, but then deleted that line just before posting.
I did that for two reasons. One, I didn’t want to drag us off topic, and two, as intriguing as a dagger-weilding and (even more) scantily clad Zoe Saldana strutting about the ISS Enterprise bridge would be, The Mirror Universe, like time travel, Klingons, Romulans, and the Borg, has been run into the ground.
The mission of this movie is to bring newness back to the franchise, and it would be a shame to squander that effort. They need to get back out to the Final Frontier and start exploring again.
As for crew transfers and situations for Uhura, let’s not forget that she didn’t become Queen Bee of the Big “E” without facing some “fair” competition. I hereby nominate Lisa Vandervoort of “Smallville” fame to be the next Yeoman Rand. Let the games begin, -Rrrrrowrr!!
Any seconds?
I’ll take a ticket to that show.
@ John,
Not bad engineering speculation. Speaking of engineering, I think (in many ways) that THAT may be the one thing missing in the consideration for the design here. It always SEEMED like at least SOME kind of consideration was put into the design of a ship (VOYAGER seeming to be the most structually effecient/sound, like it or hate it). I would like to point out that I have always considered the weakest point (all things being equal) on many a ship to be the SECONDARY HULL/WARP ENGINE junctions. I mean, just look at those pylons . . .
This was the primary problem I had with this ENTERPRISE, not only are the engines grossly oversized by fancy cowlings, but the pylon design is just architectually unsound. The mass of the SECONDARY HULL (at least from my humble understanding of physics) should be greater than the mass of the engines to help manipulate their position with greater control and less force**. A lesser mass in the SECONDARY HULL puts enormous strain on the pylons, even from a ‘resting’ state to the desired. 1701 had shear width to its struts, 01-A had clever reinforcement principles in the wedge design (but where still a bit vulnerable, yet overshadowed by its b****ing design (my favorite of all)), but these pylons (from the JJ-prise, if I may) look to be installed WRONG and do not appear to contibute to an overall harmony between the bodies involved . . . and so on.
**the PRIMARY HULL cannot exert force the SECONDARY HULL to manipulate the engines as it would put enormous torque strain on the dorsal junction in ADDITION to the strained pylons. This analysis also leaves out center-of-gravity concerns (which is likely why we have the INTEGRITY FIELD, Deus Ex strikes again). I hope you all find this interesting, I don’t wish to sound like pretentious. I do love science.
What I mean to say is, does anyone else find them an especially tempting focal point of attack? Not to mention turning/rotating at full impulse, the torque loads must be extreme to say the least. But its sci-fi, and the trailer kicks ass, so I’ll go along with it happily for now.
Additional note: I do have to applaude the proper position of the engines (in relation to the plain of the PRIMARY DRIVE), which as I am sure many of you know, is one of the keys to not shearing off the engines, but by instead rotating the SECONDARY HULL along the imaginary axis that exists lenght-wise along the plain of the PRIMARY DRIVE. I have been told by a friend to ‘put the keyboard down, Bone.’
I will comply. Pardons.
I have to comment here, for good or ill.
The positioning of the engines (as far as warp drive is concerned) is aesthetic in nature only. When the warp drive is engaged a field is create AROUND the ENTIRE ship and is then propelled forward AS A WHOLE. The notion that the engines suddenly are propel themselves to FTL speed and are merely dragging the rest of the ship with them (which is essentially what the impulse engines and manuevering thrusters do) is (to be blunt) wrong. It that were the case, I don’t care where you put the engines, once the warp drive were engaged, several catastophic things would happen.
First, anyone inside would be thrown into the nearest bulkhead and turned into hamburger from the sheer force of the sudden acceleration(the artificial gravity equipment that normally keeps things comfy inside the ship simply wouldn’t be able to compensate fast enough).
Second, the engines would simply shear off the ship and go flying off into space at warp speed (if only for a second before they fall back to less than light speed from being separated from the warp core).
Which brings me to the third bad thing. Now, that the nacelles are gone, the ship would start venting plasma and heaven knows what else and (as said in the movie Get Smart) “Ka-frikkin-boom” Not unlike the Rocket car from Mythbusters where as soon as Jamie engaged the rocket engine the car launches of the take-off ramp and promptly blows itself to smithereens.
One last thing, the reason the engines were originally placed away and back from the rest of the ship was to, in the event of an emergency, allow some spacial separation between a catastrophic engine malfunction and a supposedly separating saucer section (which as I stated earlier never happened due to technological and monetary diffuculties faced by a 1960′s special effects team.
I do have a question,however. In ST2 Wrath of Khan, when Khan fires up the Genesis divice and Enterprise tries to escape, it was stated that they only have impulse power and therefore, would not put enough distance between them and Reliant quickly enough to avoid getting killed. The scene switches to an outside view where we see our beloved ship crawling along at a snail’s pace. In contrast to this, in the original movie, when the Enterprise fires up it’s new impulse engines for the first time, we see the moon, Mars, Jupiter, and every other planet flying by inside of 30 seconds. In my book, even at only impulse speed, the Enterprise should have been putting WAY more distance between them then what we saw on screen, don’t you think?