Star Trek: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?

Published 7 years ago by , Updated February 23rd, 2014 at 12:33 pm,

ncc 1701 tos Star Trek: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?It’s sounding more and more like the original starship USS Enterprise – NCC-1701 has indeed been redesigned for Star Trek (11).

First came a report from IESB a month ago stating that the ship will have a new design in the movie. Now TrekWeb points us to a post over at the Star Trek New Voyages forum where James Cawley claims that he has seen the new starship Enterprise NCC-1701. Cawley is producer of the New Voyages fan-made Star Trek series and plays Captain Kirk as well.

He was not pleased with the new look of the iconic NCC-1701.

On the forum, Cawley makes clear that he wants the film to succeed:

“I understand the reboot thing, it is simply business and a way to hopefully sell many more new action figures and toys based on new designs, it always comes down to the money to be made. I just don’t agree with changing such iconic designs that are so ingrained in pop culture, it is really needless.”

“I would be a hypocrite if I did not believe in recasting these iconic roles, I do in fact support it. I just don’t want the production design radically changed. I see Matt Jeffries’ designs as ‘TIMELESS’ and as ‘Pure Science Fiction’, I feel the Big E as designed by Matt deserves it’s day on the big screen.”

There’s no doubt that Cawley is a huge Star Trek fan as evidenced by the fact that he has put together enough money, people and resources to have created multiple “webisodes” of a series with very impressive sets and production values (they even had George Takei guest star in one episode). There’s no doubt that’s pretty hard core, but I think from his statements that he’s at least open to the concept of rebooting the series, even if he’s not totally in favor of it.

As to his specific thoughts on the redesigned Enterprise:

“Yes, I have seen the New REBOOTED Enterprise… at any rate, I don’t like it. It is supposed to be NCC-1701, no bloody A,B,C,D or E! and it sure does not look like the 1701 I grew up with!”

“I have seen what was purported to be the final design of the New Enterprise, and I don’t like the changes. Period.”

And what does it look like, exactly?

“…all I will say is that the ship design seems to borrow heavily from ‘Contemporary Trek.’”

From his comments it sounds like the ship will retain it’s overall saucer, main hull and twin nacelle configuration but within the confines of those elements you can still have a design that is very different from the original.

For reference purposes, here is a history of the design of the USS Enterprise on TV and in the movies:

The Original Series USS Enterprise NCC-1701
compare ncc 1701 Star Trek: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?

This was the first Enterprise designed for the screen. The image above is from the newly remastered version of The Original Series and is a new CGI model. Notice how they avoided the temptation to “upgrade” it in any way. It’s completely faithful to the original.

The USS Enterprise NCC-1701-A
compare ncc 1701 a Star Trek: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?

This was the upgraded version used in the six films starring the original cast.

The USS Enterprise NCC-1701-B
compare ncc 1701 b Star Trek: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?

This ship was highlighted briefly in the awful Star Trek: Generations. It was on it’s inaugural journey and was the ship on which Captain Kirk was supposedly killed.

The USS Enterprise NCC-1701-C
compare ncc 1701 c Star Trek: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?

This ship was highlighted in the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode Yesterday’s Enterprise where it traveled through time to the future to meet Captain Picard and crew. You can see that it has more in common with the original ship and the 1701-A than it does with the 1701-B. That’s because it was designed in 1990 while the 1701-B was designed in 1994.

The USS Enterprise NCC-1701-D
compare ncc 1701 d Star Trek: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?

This is the ship that came about 100 years after Kirk’s era. It is monstrously huge and I was always torn regarding the look of it – from some angles it looks great but from others I always thought it look very ungainly.

The USS Enterprise NCC-1701-E
compare ncc 1701 e Star Trek: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?

This is the version that followed the destruction of the 1701-D. In my opinion it’s ugly as sin and I believe that it is supposed to be even larger than the already huge “D.”

Finally, here is the prime example of a new take on what is supposed to be a ship built 100 years before the NCC-1701:

The Enterprise NX-01
compare nx 01 Star Trek: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?

Long time Trek fans went nuts when they first saw this design for the TV show Star Trek: Enterprise. It was obviously based on a flipped over version of an Akira-class ship from the Next Generation era of Star Trek, therefore looking much more advanced than the original Enterprise. This, despite the fact that it was supposed to have been built and designed 100 years before the NCC-1701.

Now granted, there is a brand new production team working on the new film. As far as I know no one associated with the old production is on this including any of the art/design team that defined the look of Star Trek for so long. Still, I think they may go a little bit overboard on the Enterprise redesign in order to make it more suitable for the big screen. I would have been ok with them using the same ship as the frame but adding a bit more detail to the exterior, but I get the feeling that they’re going to fiddle with the core look of the ship.

It will be interesting to finally see what they come up with, but personally I’m nervous about it. Star Trek is almost as much about the Enterprise as it is about it’s crew.

[UPDATE: Here it is, the brand new USS Enterprise]

new enterprise flipped Star Trek: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?

Oh, and finally… here is one fan’s interpretation of what a redesigned NCC-1701 should look like (I think I would have preferred this over what they came up with):

Source: Star Trek New Voyages forum (registration required) and images from Memory Alpha

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. Well, most of these comments appear to think that the “new” Enterprise is horridly disgusting. I agree with Paul, above. This ship is gorgeous.
    There are likely two reasons that I feel this way:
    1. I grew up on Next Gen, not on TOS, so my perspective is different (I grew up on new Camaros too…).
    2. I don’t NEED to see the copy of something that was made on a shoestring budget 40 years ago. The Enterprise from TOS was a model of 60′s “bedazled” futurism. This is 2009. Our view, and the view of the vast majoprity of the moviegoing public is far different with regards to what the future should look like.
    Paramount wanted to make $$ off of the franchise (and maybe reinvigorate it). This update does that for them. The “alternate universe” idea of the film also lets them mess with more in future, so be prepared to lose more than plain hulls and Vulcan.

  2. @Paul…

    I agree with your take on the quantum universes and that all that happened before will still happen in the original universe. I thoroughly enjoyed the film, loved the new Enterprise (I thought it was great that they actually had the shuttle craft on different levels, using the room instead of having all that empty space), and I look forward to seeing a reinvigorated Trek universe. To all the haters…would you rather not have ANY new Trek? Because that’s what would have happened if this movie wasn’t successful. To me, Trek is best on the big screen and this movie looked AWESOME on the big screen.

  3. I think ST Fan may have been indulging in sarcasm… so many of the posts (especially prior to May 8 when we first actually saw the newest movie) seemed to judge who was and was not a “true” fan, as I said, based mostly on whether you like or do not like the Abrams film. Vic, your opinion is as valid as mine or anyone’s, provided you actually saw the film and are basing your opinion on FACT/experience and not speculation.

  4. @Vic
    Of course your opinion isn’t valid, mine is the only valid opinion. And unless you know how to calculate the ratio of matter to anti-matter trying to get to Qonos travelling at warp 5.5, you’re not a Trek fan. ;-)

  5. @Paul

    Wait, are you actually thinking I might NOT have seen the movie? Are you kidding? :-P


  6. @Vic

    No no, I’m thinking that all those pre- May 8 writers, who based their opinions on a few pre-release photos of the Enterprise and the fact that J.J. Abrams said he was “not a Trekkie”, especially the gentleman who said he was planning to just wait and rent the DVD (Joe, I think it was), might actually have gone so far as to not see the movie. I may be speculating wildly here, and they will let me know if I am, but those who are actually proud of being a member of a small and fairly elite audience (which you and I also are), might actually feel offended that such a mass audience has embraced the latest incarnation of Trek (“the box office says it all” and “this movie wasn’t made for us, it was made for them” are a couple quotes I remember)- and THEY might not go see the movie just out of spite (“I hope it tanks” someone also wrote). This seems illogical, like being a Democrat who is resentful at all the other people who finally voted Democrat last year (because they are newbies, “they aren’t lifelong supporters like me”).

    I’m off in an hour to see the film again. I think Sulu said it all (in “The Wrath of Khan”)– “I’m delighted at any chance to go aboard the Enterprise.”

  7. Before I start on my views on the movie, I would like to pose a question (or two) regarding the newly redesigned Enterprise. When the BBC restarted the Doctor Who series, what would science fiction fans had thought if they had opted to eliminate the iconic police box TARDIS in favor of a more modern style British phone booth? The subtle changes in plot, technique and budget was made more palatable because the shows iconic centerpiece remained unchanged. Battlestar Galactica is almost a moot point in discussions of this nature due largely in part to the fact that other than the overall plot line and characters, there are virtually no similiarities between the two series runs. it would be akin to having Shawn Ryan creating a live action reboot of The Simpson.
    In my opinion, the public, and the Star Trek fandom were not awarded their just due, in finally being able to see the classic Enterprise broght alive on the big screen, in a manner that finally made it appear “real.”
    Both fans and non fans alike would readily agree with the “cheeziness” of the original sets, wardrobe, and in many cases, overacting, however the actual vessel itself was never in question and, in many aspects transcended the series itself and became a cultural icon of exploration and discovery.
    Using the original design of the Enterprise, even with the addition of more depth and detail; including exterior bridge windows, external phaser banks and photon torpedo launchers, leaving the vessel generally in tact would have been a no-lose senerio for the Abrams team. Such a redesign was un-necessary due to it’s historical & cultural status and could be construed as a selfish and egocentric act on their behalf.
    In the aspect of the story, Abrams did us all a favor (not to ruin it for those who have yet to partake) with the overly Star Trek plot twist that temporal dynamics provide. In some aspects, it makes the debatable undebatable.
    On the technological sides, Star Fleet appeared to be more organized, however, more of a militaristic organize and less oriented towards science as it’s prior incarnations. It seems to make for a more organized structure within Starfleet, but also manages to deminish some of the exploratory feel of Roddenberry’s image of the organization.
    Again, without the spoiler, you cannot really discuss the career relationships of the central characters under cannon, as here, it does not apply. However, many of the roles are note worthy for their rendition of the classic characters. By the end of the movie, I was easily able to see both Kirk and Spock, not from the mannerisms, but from the central points of those characters. Scotty as comic relief is well played. Intresting though, is the choices to portray the bumbling Ensign Chekov and a child genius and Uhura as a sex symbol. By far, the most noteworthy performace of the film, was Urban’s modern, yet accurate performance as Dr. McCoy.
    Overall, the film was successful enough, even to me, to leave me wondering about an upcoming television series, or at least a sequal.

  8. I loved watching the old startrek episodes. they were campy and fun. I loved TNG, it was big beautiful and stories were grand. I enjoyed Voyager, it was adventurous and the effects were brilliant. The ones after, not so much.

    But I liked this latest movie most of all. It is fun and campy, the universe was big and sets were beautiful. It was full of adventure and the effects were great!!!

    I love startrek, but i watch other sci fi series too. Startrek was the first but the ones that followed helped expand and enrich the genre. Diverse numbers of ships, designs, stories, technologies cropped up because of them. I loved it!!! The other series have great ideas too and I don’t think it is irreverent or disrespectful if Startrek incorporated those great ideas into itself. I mean startrek IS space drama, it is the genre.

    the ship was like a rough and tumble ready mix of all the ships I’ve come to love, in the recognizable enterprise profile. I was startled at first but I loved it by the end of the film.

  9. @Dan
    Nice analysis. As a Trekker, I did overly analyze much of the film using what I know about the Trek universe but I still came out loving the film. And your comment about Urban is exactly the same as mine; I thought he nailed McCoy’s character. I would rather they do a sequel instead of another series; at least hold off for a few years for a series.

  10. Wow, fun discussion! But I think we’ve strayed a bit (partly my fault, I’ve done this too) from the original topic, “How Radical Is The Enterprise Re-Design?” into just movie reviews, worthy though these are.
    And in answer to the central question, I agree with Lt Marky- it’s a ready-mix of all the ships and with the classic Enterprise profile. The primary hull is still a saucer mounted on a big pylon (both having more in common with the “Motion Picture” Enterprise refit than the original Matt Jeffries design); the engineering hull is still basically a tube, with a shuttle bay in the rear and a big deflector dish in the front (this one glows and seems a lot bigger, but that ought to make it better at deflecting, right?); and the warp nacelles are still basically two more tubes mounted on long pylons (slightly bent/curved this time), with glowing bits in front and two long attachments at the rear (I think those are the intercoolers, I could be wrong). The whole design is a lot more “blended” than the original designs, in keeping with what we now know to be cutting-edge technology (e.g. the stealth fighter and F-22), but not nearly as blended as the “E”-model Sovereign-class ship- which is as it should be, this is a much earlier design. But as I said in my earlier post, it doesn’t make sense to think that, if history changed 25 years ago, the design would magically turn out to be the same in this new timeline as in the original series! (Wierdly, the Klingon cruiser doesn’t seem to have changed that I could see from our brief look- but then again, it wasn’t their history that changed so much, was it? I mean, war with the Federation- what else is there to say?)

    This Enterprise is no more radical than any other we’ve seen- and remember, the original design (all hail Matt Jeffries) was considered pretty darn radical in 1966, when TV and movie spaceships were either Flash Gordon rockets or huge saucers ala “The Day the Earth Stood Still”. I think this redesign, like the whole movie, is a fitting tribute to the original as well as a stunningly cool (is that a phaser joke?) update for the 21st Century!
    I’m hoping they’re on “warp speed” for the next script as we speak!

  11. I now know why the Enterprise was changed, it’s because of the alternate timeline created when Nero and “Prime” Spock went back in time. So the changes makes perfect sense to me! :D

  12. I know we just got the new version of Kirks old version of the Enterprise but I’m starting to scratch my head on the refurbishment of the ship already. I’ve only come up with ideas of the pylons scince the sleek look is it, I would like to improvise from Enterprise-E’s pylons in a reversed kind of way to preserve the jet wing look. Any one know of any sites that have this idea going on?

  13. Im a long time Trek fan, and I thought the new movie was AWFUL. It was dumbed-down with a story that made no sense. It felt rushed, sloppy and didnt seem like Star Trek at all. It was heavy on the FX and sound design and light on the clarity of the story. It also laid waste to the Star trek universe that we know. Definitely Trek for the new generation of kids who cant sit through a film with a story that moves at a normal pace.

    • Here here!
      It was a story as far-fetched and stupid as Stat Trek: Generations. What a farce. Were we duped? Did they make a spoof of Star Trek that we all though was real?

  14. And the Enterprise E is a beautiful gorgeous ship.

  15. As a longtime Trek fan (having enjoyed all the series and movies except the abominable ST 5), I found I walked out of the movie with all the right itches scratched, all the right notes hit. I am optimistic for the future of the franchise.

    My biggest question is when a cutaway poster of the new Enterprise will be available. I’ve got every cutaway poster I have been able to lay my hands on, and am jonesing bad for this next ship…where is the product marketing blitz? Gimme gimme gimme!

  16. A post on this thread speculated about me seeing the movie. At first, I refused to watch it because of the negative advertisement used on the MTV crowd. JJ Abrams, in my opinion, made a lot of moves purposely to push Trek fans out of the way. In a sense, the advertisements came as an insult to the Trek fans, knowing that the non-trek fans would gain interest in seeing that a new Star Trek movie was being made for them, and not for the fans. That, of course, turned out to be a mistake. Based on what I’ve seen, very few new fans have come on board. The movie did great on opening week, and even had a great second week. But the cost for producing this movie did not necessarily make a box office smash, as all thought it would. When you consider the over-all cost of producing this movie, compared to its gain, they didn’t even break even. Then again, they still have DVD sells to look forward to, of which I will most certainly NOT buy it. Neither will I ever add it to my collection of beloved Star Trek films.

    I agree with one poster who stated that they “Dumbed down” the movie to attract the non-intellectuals. This new movies was all about thrill rides, FX resolutions, and sound waves. The story was absolutely garbled with no apparent climax, and had the appearance of the LOST episodes. JJ Abrams, in my opinion, pushed more Trek fans away, than gained them. And the theoretical new fan base is not as high-leveled as everyone is making it. I’ve asked very non-trek person I know who seen the movie and liked it, if they would become Star Trek fans, and all of them said no.

    Finally, the new design is not “gorgeous” as some like. If you like it, then that is OK. But this design is not my taste. It’s too radical and curvy, and doesn’t have the traditional Star Trek design. There’s no grace in her motion, and all of her angels appear out of proportion.

    Will I continue to be a Trek fan? Yes, I will always love the Original Series, and the Next Generation films. But this garbage of a movie has no taste, not intellect, no climax, and the worst imagined starship I’ve ever seen. The fellow that designed this thing is a failure.

    If JJ Abrams wants to see more Trek fans return, he might have one suggestion to follow. BLOW THAT THING TO HELL!

    It’s too damn ugly! And that’s nearly a fact! On the Star TrekNewVoyages website, a poll shows that the original series Enterprise maintains the lead of acceptance. So although there are a few who like the new design, they are not enough to overwhelm the majority acceptance of the original and TRUE Enterprise.

    I rank them Enterprise designs in this order:

    1. TOS Enterprise
    2. Refit Enterprise
    3. Refit Enterprise A
    4. USS Enterprise-E

    The rest are all garbage to me, the worst being J-Treks Enterprise.

    In conclusion, I gave it a chance. But with the weak story line, the senseless plot, weak climax, and over-designed toilet, I give the new movie several thumbs down! I will never accept anything JJ Abrams has to offer.


    Unchanged, and unmotivated. :o)

  17. According to Wikipedia, this Trek is the highest-grossing of all the films in the franchise. This is more than “nearly a fact.” I quote- “Adjusted and unadjusted for inflation, it beat Star Trek: First Contact for the largest US opening for a Star Trek film.” Sounds pretty successful to me.

    I love the appearance of the new ship. That is an actual fact (well, it’s a fact that it is my opinion).

    Joe, consider that a poll or debate on any Trek site is pretty much statistically irrelevant (including the little discussion we’re having right now!), in that you have a self-selected sample- ie. those who went to the site in the first place and then chose to answer the survey. It’s like a TV-news channel phone-in poll- it has no bearing on anything except the opinions of those who chose to call in. This is just mental gymnastics for us.

    The TRUE Enterprise is any Enterprise that is put on screen. I gotta love ‘em all.

    More later. Keep flyin’.

  18. Hello Paul.

    While I agree with you that this Star Trek had the highest turn out than any previous Star Trek film, I would not exactly count that as a success. You didn’t mention the cost it took to make this film, nor did you mention the amount of money poured into its advertisement campaign. From what I’ve heard, they didn’t have enough money to build the sets as they wanted. That’s why the Engine room looked cheap and cheesy; they used a bear factory, which looked quite awful.

    Now regarding the high turn out, I’d be cautious in this because curiosity is what drove most people to see the movie. While many Trek fans were excited to see a new movie released, this didn’t mean they liked it just because they went to see it. There were many who felt as I did in the theater. Some worse because they got up and walked out; it was that bad.

    As for new fans, I’d say there was only a small handful that stated they would become Trek fans, but most probably won’t. Even though they were thrilled by the movie, it was not enough to convert them to the world of Star Trek. I’ve asked many of them, and their response was that Star Trek was still a geeks film. I wouldn’t count on them showing up at the next Star Trek convention.

    Finally, regarding the Enterprise, if you like the new design, then good for you. But the majority of us think it sucked badly. This design is why out of proportion, and has too many curves. I’m quite positive that if they had used the original design, although dressed up for the wide screen, JJ Abrams would have had a higher acceptance rate from traditional Star Trek fans. It would have been a win/win result. As a result of the over-designed ship, it was a win/loss result.

    I agree that polls can be biased, but I’m not seeing anyone thrilled over the new design. Some say it looked awesome, but I doubt you’ll see them heading off to the hobby shop to purchase the new Enterprise. If you visit the On-Line Star Trek store, you’ll note that they have plenty of stock on the JJ Enterprise. But try to order the new “Where No Man has Gone Before” Enterprise, and be prepared to wait. So far, they ran out of stock twice. I’m hoping they have a new batch in this month (October). I can’t wait to get my hands on it.

    If I had a wife who would let me spend the money, I would have purchased the Master’s Replica of the Original Series; it’s absolutely gorgeous.

    Well Paul, take care.


  19. Joe,
    I dont care what you say about the new Trek! You are obviously stuck in a past that wouldnt let TOS go ne farther!! Now we get to relive Kirk and his crew ( which most from TOS are dead) on new adventures. I first watched Star Trek TOS (the only series that matters) with my Dad. My Dad is a Vietnam Vet and first watched Star Trek in country (i doubt you know what that means cause your a loser)! I took my Dad to see the new movie and he thought it was the best he had ever seen. The last time my Dad watched a movie was in a drive thru in 1982 (Wrath of Kahn)!! If you want to dispute a TRUE TOS fan, say something about Vietnam!!! You probably have no comment now!! I served in Kosovo and Irag War, 7 years in the Marine Corps…My opinion, and my DADS matter!!! YOURS DOES NOT!!! The new ENTERPRISE and the new crew, and the NEW movie, according to people who fought for this country, THE BEST EVER…

  20. my opinion of the new enterprise is i like the design but the interior of the enginering section looks like a water teatment or sewage plant other than that its fine

  21. The Abrahms Enterprise is no more different from the original than the A was from the original. Big deal. It’s not the real Trek, it’s re-imagined and yet still keeps the general feel of all our favorite props.

    It’s far better than the redone planets and special effect of the remastered TOS. They’ve killed the feel of the 60′s sci-fi.

    Also “it’s” is a contraction of the words IT and IS, please correct your spelling in your initial post. Unless you meant IT IS, you should be spelling it “its”. There is no apostrophe, just like HIS and HERS. (I think the modification of the english language is at least as bad as any trek redesign. =P )

  22. OK, well this has been quite the adventurous little thread. A lot of people taking simple entertainment WAY to seriously. I grew up watching the original series, getting to know the original characters, and looking at modern technology through the eyes of a Star Trek viewer. Who would have though that my cell phone would have looked like the communicatior? TOS gave future engineers and scientists something to sink their teeth into, something to strive for, and in many cases what we saw on that TV show came into being. However, with the rapid advances in technology and design, a “new” audience is much less likely to accept the Enterprise as we, the older generation, came to know her…just like the designers of the USS Abe Lincoln did not follow the exact design of the venerable WWII aircraft carriers, JJ and his crew took the overall aspect, and shined the light of modern design on to it. It doesn’t make it wrong, or terrible, or a defiling of our expectations, it merely put the Enterprise in a light that modern eyes would not consider “outdated”.

    I love the old Matt J. design…and for the 1960′s it represented a step forward in design, based on the current tech. However, it is now the 21st century, and we have eyes that have seen men on the moon, pictures from the surface of Mars…we have cell phones that make the old Tricorder look like a crystal radio set with a polaroid taped to it. Like all things, it was time for TOS to grow up. I think JJ saw that, and I think modern viewers accept that. The new design has its merits and shortcomings just like the original design did, and if they chose to go forward with it, it will grow and change as it needs too…so, just let it be what it is. I was neither happy nor heart broken by it, and understand, that as a work of science fiction, it will have to stand on its own two feet…just like TOS did.

    Let it go people…grow up…move out of mama’s basement.

  23. Joe,
    I’m a youth blogger.
    And I’m also a trek fan (Though Star Wars is better)
    I have in fact watched every episode of TOS, TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise, and every movie put out.

    And I absolutely, completely disagree with you.
    The ship, Absolutely GORGEOUS. Her curves are not disproportioned and ungainly, but graceful and elegant. The three tubes and a plate of the original enterprise, while it may have sufficed as spacey fifty years ago, looks outdated even by modern day standards and it’s not supposed to be made for 200 years.

    I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t be caught dead in the sights of a klingon warbird in something that looked like it went out of style a century ago, especially if I were trying to intimidate.

    • oh. and, fyi, I don’t live in my mom’s basement. I live in my father’s attic.
      Closer to the aliens that way :P

  24. WHat an awful,plain ugly looking ship. I won’t even call it the Enterprise.

  25. I was surprised that a genius like JJ Abrams would depict the USS ENTERPRISE with such total changes in its look inside & outside. I even sent Mr. Abrams’ R&D unit at BadRobot-Paramount photos I took of the 11-foot model showcased in the Smithsonian. The original, a “Rembrant”-like masterpiece, has a greenish tint, for one thing, (which is very important for the consistencey of the Tritanium hull & materials sciences of the OS universe). The details matter. Mr. Abrams changed the entire look! It’s like, he took a Rembrant, painted his version over it, put his name on it, then hung it back on the museums wall! I sent him a letter, too, about that! I was thoroughly disappointed at the movie! I wanted to see the O.S. Enterprise fly through space again, (not Mr. Abramses version of it!), and the story made no consistent sense with regard to the O.S.! The ONLY way Mr. Abrams can fix this vandalism and mockery of Gene Roddenberry’s visions, is to do another movie, BUT with the Original Series EXACTLY represented (not misrepresented), which means the replication of the USS ENTERPRISE from the Smithsonian, and the O.S. sets as depicted. Otherwise, it’s like taking a trade name (“STAR TREK”), and putting JJ Abrams name on it instead.- My gmail: irt1701.

  26. While I agree they were never going to use the original, and the plot gives a good excuse not to, I was not opposed to a redesign, I have a serious problem with the big bulge on the front of the warp nacelles. This is my only complaint but I think this seriously destroys the aesthetics of the design.