Exclusive Details On Playmates Full Line Of Star Trek Movie Toys + Hi Res Images | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Exclusive Details On Playmates Full Line Of Star Trek Movie Toys + Hi Res Images January 23, 2009

by John Tenuto , Filed under: Merchandise,Star Trek (2009 film),Toys , trackback

Over the last week there has been a lot of news and images floating around for Playmates Toys line of toys and figures for the new Star Trek movie. Today, with the help of Playmates, TrekMovie puts it all together, presenting the full line with exclusive details, analysis and high resolution images. See below for everything you could want to know about Playmates and Trek.

 

Playmates and Trek – together again in April
Playmates Toys, king of Trek toys in the 90s, is back in a big way with an extensive collection of toys and figures for the new Star Trek movie. This first wave from Playmates arrives April 19th and should be in all the big stores like Toys R Us, Target and Wal-Mart, as well as online at the usual toy sites (like Entertainment Earth). CBS Consumer Products and Playmates have provided TrekMovie with the full set of details, as well as images of this first wave.

NOTE Regarding pricing, Playmates does not do ‘suggested retail prices,’ but has provided us with ‘estimated prices’ for the big stores.

‘Galaxy Collection’ Action Figures (3 3/4") [$7/each]
The big item for kids (and collectors) will be the 3.75" action figures. Playmates has a set of 10 planned for wave one. The 3.75" figures are highly detailed, fully-articulated, and come with removable utility belt, Phaser, and standing base. The set includes six figures in their ‘Enterprise Outfit’ (Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Uhura, Sulu, & Pike), McCoy and Chekov in ‘Cadet Outfit,’ plus ‘Original Spock’ (Nimoy), and Nero.


Galaxy Collection (click to enlarge)

Fan and collector reaction at TrekMovie and toy collecting forums to the early images of this line have been extremely favorable. Playmates Toys new 3.75" action figures show how much toy making technology has improved during the previous decades.
 

Playsets
Each 3.75” figure (above) comes with a specific Bridge or Transporter Room playset accessory that allows you build out the entire Bridge and Transporter Room playset when you collect all the 3.75” figures. You combine those elements with the two ‘core’ playsets.

Star Trek Bridge Playset w/figure [$25]
This authentic playset simulates Bridge environment from Star Trek movie. The core set comes with a 3.75" Kirk figure and includes the floorplan map, captain’s chair, front console, view screen and two side screens. Additional bridge pieces will come with 3.75" figures to build out the complete bridge playset.


Completed Bridge Playset (click to enlarge)

Transporter Room Playset w/figure [$30]
Interactive playset simulates ‘Transport feature’ from Star Trek movie. Any 3.75" Star Trek figure can be placed into Transport Cylinder and ‘transported’ to other locations.
Transporter Playset includes authentic lights and sounds, a transport platform base, and a 3.75" Scotty figure. Additional Transporter pieces will come with 3.75" figures to build out the complete transporter playset.


Completed Transporter Playset (click to enlarge)

Because of retailer shelf space concerns, playsets are less common than they were in the 1980s and before. That Star Trek is getting two playsets is a sign of the commitment and confidence Playmates Toys has in this line. The inclusion of Bridge and Transporter playset items with the figures are a fun idea both for collectors and a value-added surprise for those who enjoy opening their toys.

‘Warp Collection’ Action Figures (6")  [$9/each]
Playmates Toys also has a set of ten 6" figures. This line is a bit more life-like and the figures are fully articulated and come outfitted with soft, flexible PVC shirts. Accessories include standing base, removable utility belt and a signature movie phaser and communicator. The set includes five figures in their ‘Enterprise Outfit’ (Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Sulu, & Pike), three figures in ‘Cadet Outfit’ (McCoy, Chekov & Uhura), plus ‘Original Spock’ (Nimoy), and Nero


Warp Collection (click to enlarge)

Last weekend a leaked prototype image of the Kirk 6" line was met with resistance from most fans, especially because of what is now the infamous "sweater" uniform. However, this new image shows a more detailed and reassuring set of action figures. This sized line is a kind of hybrid toy that could be used primarily for play or for display. The Playmates Toys items feature good, and in some instances excellent, likenesses of the characters (especially McCoy and Nero).


‘Command Collection’ Action Figures (12") 
[$30/each]
The ultimate set for collectors, Playmates Toys’ 12" figures are life-like, and fully articulated. Clothing and uniforms for each figure is made of fabric with the utmost attention paid to style and detail. Each also comes with signature accessories. The four figures offered are Kirk, Spock and McCoy (all in ‘Enterprise Outfit’), plus Original Spock. There will also be an additional Nero, which is an exclusive for one of the big retailers (Playmates isn’t saying, but we would guess Toys R Us).


Command Collection (click to enlarge)

The 12" line has different purposes that the 6" and 3.75" lines. 12 inch figures are often about displayability, while 3.75" are about playability. The larger size and utilization of cloth is especially a benefit for both costume and accessory detailing as is revealed in the USA Today picture. Having an exclusive item like Nero also adds to the fun of collecting.
 

Electronic Role Play Toys [$15 each]
Are you ready to feel like a kid again? Get ready to play ‘landing party’ with three role-playing toys from Playmates, based on the actual props from the Star Trek movie. Each features lights and sounds.

Electronic Starfleet Phaser
The electronic Starfleet Phaser is constructed of vacuum-metalized ABS and makes authentic Star Trek movie sounds when activated. The gun barrel pivots horizontally to switch from Stun to Vaporize, with each setting having its own set of lights and sounds.


Phaser (click to enlarge)

Electronic Tricorder
Lights-up and makes authentic Star Trek movie sounds when buttons are pressed.
Also features sound-off activation sounds and spring-loaded top and front door covers.


Tricorder (click to enlarge)

Electronic Starfleet Communicator
This roleplay item is based on the Starfleet Communicator used in the movie. The cover manually flips open to reveal the Starfleet Federation logo. Press the activation buttons to see authentic lights and hear character phrases from the movie.


Communicator (click to enlarge)

While certainly meant for play, the Playmates Toys role playing items also have an appeal for collectors and fans of Trek tech. The tricorder, phaser, and communicator toys offer an alternative for those who do not wish to spend hundreds of dollars on prop replicas yet who still want to own nicely detailed versions of this troika of Trek icons.

Enterprise Iconic Vehicle  [$30]
Authentic and detailed scaled model of USS Enterprise ship as seen in Star Trek movie. Features U.S.S. Enterprise sound effects and real Kirk and Spock dialogue from the Star Trek movie. The ship comes with a Delta Shield display base (with ball/socket attachment tip) that attaches to bottom of ship’s lower hull, and allows user to pivot ship 360’.


USS Enterprise (click to enlarge)

Starship toys, and the amazing variety of the offerings, were one of the best things about the original 1990s Playmates Toys Star Trek line. What is nice is that Playmates Toys has remembered what was good about their original line, and added modern sensibilities and detailing. The Enterprise is thankfully a manageable size (sometimes a problem with Star Wars toys) and this is another example of Playmates Toys nicely blending the preferences of those who play and those display.

Wave 2 and more coming later in 2009
If all of the above wasn’t enough, Playmates Toys has more coming later in the year. Paul Fish, Playmates VP of marketing and product development, tells TrekMovie he hopes to have two more waves of toys by Christmas, with Wave 2 coming around September. Fish, who describes himself as a ‘life-long Trek geek,’ says that Playmates is very excited to be back with Star Trek and hopes to stay with Trek into 2010 and maybe beyond. Details are still being worked out on the second wave but he expects it to include a utility belt for the roleplay toys, the Narada (Nero’s Romulan ‘Jellyfish’) ship toy, and more. They also will be doing more figure of additional characters and outfit variations (like Kirk in the black shirt). TrekMovie was the first to announce Playmates involvement in Trek a year ago and will continue to be the leading site for all news related to Star Trek toys and collectibles.

Regarding those Wizard images
On Thursday Wizard Universe put up images and pre-order links for the Playmates Toy Line. Some images were the same as those seen here and in USA Today and some appeared different.  Playmates tells TrekMovie that the images provided to us and USA Today are the latest and best and that many of the images at Wizard were earlier prototypes. Wizard has since removed all of their photos. So use the above pictures as your guide. Wizard also had an image of the Narada (which is coming in Wave 2), but the image put out was just a concept and TrekMovie is told the toy has yet to be designed and finalized. 


Personal thoughts about the line

Star Trek is a family affair at my house, as my wife Maria Jose and six year old son are fans. We have been very excited about the idea that Star Trek might be returning to mainstream popularity again and perhaps restore the faith of those who became disenchanted with the franchise while gaining new generation of fans. The release this week of the Playmates Toys details and images have been the first very reassuring sign that this is going to happen. This is looks to be a quality line, with a toy company committed to reaching different kinds of fans (younger and older, collectors and players, different genders, different economic concerns). There is something for everyone and these toys look like they will be fun to both collect and to share with family or friends. These items are toys in the best sense of the word.
 

Pre-order Playmates Star Trek at Entertainment Earth
All of the above items can be reserved by pre-ordering at Entertainment Earth. As noted, Playmates has ‘estimated’ discounted prices for big retailers, but the big stores have yet to set their prices. The pre-order prices at Entertainment Earth are not discounted, but they do have a low-price guarantee. Reserving your items now can give you peace of mind that you will get what you want.

And don’t forget Mattel’s Barbies
In addition to all of the above from Playmates Toys, Mattel is also releasing their own line of three collectible 12" Star Trek movie figures from their Barbie line [see TrekMovie story for more details and pics].


Kirk, Spock and Uhura via Barbie [Mattel]

 

Images except where otherwise noted courtesy of Playmates Toys

Comments

1. Sean4000 - January 23, 2009

Can’t wait for the Narada and hopefully the Kelvin!

2. SChaos1701 - January 23, 2009

Nice…FIRST!!!!

3. Spockanella - January 23, 2009

It’s official…there’s something seriously wrong with me.

I want to buy these and play with them! I NEVER buy Trek toys!

4. Captain Roy Mustang - January 23, 2009

Sweeeet! im getting them Hell ya

5. SChaos1701 - January 23, 2009

I’m 28 and I’m considering buying these and saying “Screw this collecting crap! I wanna play with these things!”

6. Ashley - January 23, 2009

aww old spock looks sad in this pic: http://trekmovie.com/images/merchandise/pmst09/6inGroup_wNeroSpock.jpg
*hugs*

and the phaser rotates horizontally? that’s…a bit odd… looks cool overall though!

7. Rick Sternbach - January 23, 2009

Well, I can say that if I ever pick up one of those phasers, I’ll knock back the chrome plating with some darker metallic colors like a nice gray hammertone. Maybe a few copper accents. Chrome sounds like a Colt .45 that Gen. Patton would have used. :)

8. Mirror Jordan - January 23, 2009

Already got that Enterprise pre-ordered! Awesome stuff!

9. grid - January 23, 2009

now from this angle, the new enterprise looks fantastic:

http://trekmovie.com/images/merchandise/pmst09/Enterprise_HiRes2%20Rev.jpg

too bad we saw that awkward side view with the shuttle in front first. the more angles we see it from, the better it looks.

10. Anthony Pascale - January 23, 2009

Rick
the real prop isn’t as shiny as the playmates toy…maybe there will be a high end replica that will save you the trouble of doing your own plating

11. dane - January 23, 2009

i just jizzed in my pants

12. SirMartman - January 23, 2009

Re # 9

That pic makes a nice screensaver too

:o)

13. Cenobyte - January 23, 2009

im cool with all these ;)

14. Andrew - January 23, 2009

I like the phaser but not the color. It looks like a Dollar Store ray gun. I would probably want to repaint it. I like the design though. I love the Enterprise toy.

15. grid - January 23, 2009

#12 – it’d be nice to see the fully detailed model from that angle, not just a low detail toy.

16. Katarian Eggs - January 23, 2009

I just puked in my mouth!

17. MattTheTrekkie - January 23, 2009

#9

I think they knew that any change would take Trek fans some time to get used to. I think they picked the worst angle to show us first, then better ones later.

Just a theory though. As for me, I have a hard time NOT liking it, it just looks cool ;)

18. SChaos1701 - January 23, 2009

Oh here we. Cue in the haters.

19. MattTheTrekkie - January 23, 2009

#15

I agree…

Any 3D animators finnished a version yet? ANYONE? :)

20. Katarian Eggs - January 23, 2009

It’s nice to see the Enteprise in better detail; at least it seems to have some of the proper markings here including the starfleet striping on the sides of the secondary hull. The hideous screen shot they released first was very bleek & colourless.
But these are as bad as Playmates previous crap lines! Not that I’ll buy any merchandise for this debacle.

21. LoyalStarTrekFan - January 23, 2009

I’m impressed. I’ve been concerned that this film will be designed as an action film and forget what Star Trek is all about. While I’m still concerned about the plot based on what I’ve seen in the trailer I’m not concerned when it comes to costuming, prop or set design. I’m very impressed with what I’ve seen so far from Playmates and it boosts my confidence in the film as whole. The costumes look perfect, the props look like modern takes on TOS and they look like they belong in the TOS era and not the TNG era. By that statement I mean that the Phaser, Tricorder, etc. look less advanced than TNG equipment. In fact the Phaser has a similar shape to the Phaser used in STIII: The Search for Spock. I am also impressed with the ship, which looks like a modern take on the TOS Enterprise and a precursor to the TMP Enterprise. The Bridge looks a little busy but I like it. I will definatly be adding the prop and ship toys to my collection and proudly put them on display. I don’t collect playsets but they look nice.

7 and 10, I agree that the Phaser looks a bit shiny and its good to hear that the Phaser isn’t as shiny in the film. The Phaser still looks very nice though.

22. Lucas - January 23, 2009

RE: The Phaser

“the actual prop is NOT CHROME. It is dull stainless steel, with a lot of TOS blue-grey accents. It has a somewhat worn appearance, not unlike a real gun that’s seen some use. Those who assert the screen prop has the same surface tone and texture as the toy version simply don’t know what they’re talking about.”

23. Tanner Waterbury (HUGE PINK FLOYD FAN) - January 23, 2009

I think the McCoy is the best likeness of Karl Urban. Damn good sculpting job there.

24. I am not Herbert - January 23, 2009

Phaser: “rotating barrel” looks pretty unwieldy… does it have a “thumb trigger”? WTF?

Tricorder: No video screen? WTF?

Communicator: not sure how that “dial” is supposed to work… WTF?

25. Odkin - January 23, 2009

These are as good or better than any other Trek toys I’ve seen. And I’m glad they are actually making TOYS instead of prop replicas or statues or collectible figures.

As far as how the props will look in the movie…

I assume on the communicator that the inside of what used to be the “antenna grid” will now be a video image. Hopefully the round area that used to be the moire will be some colorful swirly groovy light thing.

The phaser does look the worst of the lot. I’m encouraged that the real prop won’t be chrome and will have the blue-grey color. I hate little PC changes like “stun and vaporize” instead of “stun and kill”. If the red-blue muzzle is supposed to rotate to switch modes, i hope it is done by pressing some button and not manually flipping it around. You could shoot your finger off that way! (or maybe just stun it)

Poor “old” Spock. Looks like he’s about to yell at those youngsters to get the hell off his lawn.

26. ThePhaige - January 23, 2009

Is it me or when you expand the crew shot Command Collection, do the small striations that make up the texture on the shirts look like little Star Fleet insignias?

27. Enterprise - January 23, 2009

Ia that old Spock on the bridge of the Enterprise? Why would he be there?

28. Riker 001 - January 23, 2009

I think the Enterprise looks great! JJ did a nice job updating the look while keeping in mind the essence of a big part of the overall story…well done…!

29. Weerd1 - January 23, 2009

Love the 3.75- hate the 6 inch. Want the bridge REAL BAD. Like the phaser, but would prefer “metallic grey” to chrome.

30. Sean - January 23, 2009

This angle of the new Enterprise makes the ship look GREAT! It’s the best look we’ve had at it yet. I was never able to get my hands on a model of the Constitution refit (1701 or 1701-A), and this looks enough like it to make me want to get it!

The phaser looks… interesting. It kinda reminds me of the Star Trek VI look, but silver.

The first look at the tricorder made it look stupid, but this look is a bit better. I’m still not crazy about it, but I’m sure it will grow on me.

The communicator looks like… nothing. It doesn’t seem to have any buttons and I don’t see it being able to do anything. A communicator has to have buttons!

31. 1 - January 23, 2009

So these won’t be available until April?

32. SciFiMetalGirl - January 23, 2009

#26 – Yep, they are! The actual uniforms in the movie have the same textures in them too! Nice!

33. jeffery wright - January 23, 2009

so, they’re really going to stick with these designs, eh?

rotating barrel? phaser with only two settings? i think we’re being pranked.

i suppose they felt that cramming the 1701 arrowhead in every aspect of design would make these really, really ‘trek’…

how much information can really be conveyed from that tricorder interface?

looks like an oversized decibel meter… “it’s loud, jim… very loud, see? peaks into the red….”

is that hal9000 integrated into the communicator? “what do you think you’re doing, jim… stop jim… stop…”

jefferies 1701 = bold and confident

abrams 1701 = cringing and defensive

i am certain we’re the victims of an elaborate joke…

good post, at least we’re seeing more stuff.

34. Darkwing - January 23, 2009

#26

The shirts are made up of a pattern very similar to the insignias, check out one of the photos of the production. and… i like toys!!!!!!

35. DavidJ - January 23, 2009

Man, I absolutely LOVE the bridge and phaser designs.

As for the action figures, I have to say the 3.75 inch figures look better than ANY of the larger ones. For the size and money, I would have expected much better likenesses than what they came up with.

36. richpit - January 23, 2009

I’m not in love with any of them, but I’ll still be at Target on April 19th to buy the comm, phaser & tricorder. And I’ll be opening them and PLAYING with them!

I suggest you all do the same.

37. 750 Mang - January 23, 2009

Thanks for the new toys, but these really pale in comparison their Art Asylum counterparts.

Bridge set seems cool.

RTF!

38. Gibnerd - January 23, 2009

i just don’t know about these. i’m a big figure collector & trek fan and i am just not pumped about this line. i mean i feel like i’ve been spoiled by the Diamond Select line and these just… don’t look right. i want good likeness, maybe a little but of a pose…. something,
now for the younger crwod, these are great. perfect actually. they remind me of my old TMP figures I had *and still have) when i was real little.
actually some of these would look cool next to them… dang it. they got me.

39. CarlG - January 23, 2009

I agree, this is a much better angle for the Enterprise.
Still would like to see the actual film models and props, though. Being toys, they’re likely a lot less detailed and built chunkier and flashier than the real deal.

@16: Oh dear, and all over your best bib too, I’m sure. Anything we can get you? Paper towels? Breath mints? Movie ticket for May 9th?

@33: An “elaborate joke”? Marketing does not *work* that way! Good night!

40. Stanky McFibberich - January 23, 2009

re 35:
“Man, I absolutely LOVE the bridge and phaser designs.”

Man, I absolutely DETEST the bridge design. Almost exactly what I expected though.

As for the ship design, I try not to use that kind of language in public.

41. AJ - January 23, 2009

These images are way better than what cam before, though the “E” definitely has ‘oversized thigh” syndrome. And that is more likely to come from the film’s production design than anything Playmates is replicating.

It would be truly great to get kids back into the Star Trek toy business. These toys are meant to be played with, and not kept in boxes.

42. kye - January 23, 2009

ha! i was right, the one enterprise was the prototype..Does happy dance…
I am so glad that i get to see these in more detail. I am sooo getting the enterprise and the smaller figures. Im not to certain about the 12 inch ones yet!

43. Ensign Ro- (short for Roland) - January 23, 2009

Personally, I’m digging the new prop designs. I used to collect Trek as a child….I may become a 46 year old child.

44. Dooger - January 23, 2009

The texture on the shirts looks ribbed for her pleasure.

45. C.S. Lewis - January 23, 2009

Among other disciplines, I enjoy the shooting sports. It is difficult to understand why an armoury would design a hand held weapon such as this phaser. It is the firearms equivalent of Velcro — it will snag on everything. Look at the sharp edges and protrusions. Does the designer not have experience with sidearms?

In short, this is not my choice for field patrol or El Presidente drills. Give me an old fashioned but effective 1911 before this patch of brambles.

Sincerely,

C.S. Lewis

46. Planet Pandro - January 23, 2009

I’ve always been a fan of the Trek playmates toys from the 90’s…looks like i’m going to have alot to add to the collection! disposable income, I hardly knew ye…

47. Devon - January 23, 2009

#33 –

“jefferies 1701 = bold and confident

abrams 1701 = cringing and defensive”

Umm yeah okay.

“i am certain we’re the victims of an elaborate joke…”

You are the only one laughing that I see.

New ship definitely looks terrific from that angle!

48. ShawnP - January 23, 2009

I love how the Nero figure has one ear Tyson-ified. How accurate.

49. Tom - January 23, 2009

While I’m glad the new Trek film is being represented with so many cool toys that will lighten my wallet, I am quite disappointed with the Enterprise detailing.
I realize Playmates is trying to keep the ship at a certain price point, but for the same amount you can get an Art Asylum Starfleet ship with much better detailing and paint scheme (I got the Enterprise-A and E electronic ships, for around $29 each, and the detailing is far superior).
Playmates made decently-detailed figs in the ’90s, but they fell short when it came to delivering a quality ship with good detailing. Look up some of them on ebay.
Hopefully these are test shots of unfinished product and the paint scheme will be great.

50. THE GOVERNATOR - January 23, 2009

That is the most gorgeous ship I’ve ever seen. Of course the original is the best and the most iconic, this is cool too. I’m very pleased that they brought many design elements from the TOS movie version.

the tricorder, communicator, and phaser props look great too. (if the phaser looks too shiny, don’t worry, it will be more metallic looking in the movie.)

51. spock - January 23, 2009

The phaser, communicator and the tricorder just scream..GALAXY QUEST. Why did they choose to make them silver, that is really scifi cliche.

52. Mike Spacely - January 23, 2009

Notice the detailing on the glass display panels on the bridge? Straight out of TOS. This is the kind of touch necessary to establish this new movie as an updated version of what has come before it, not just a cheap imitation. There are alot of nods to the original in the set design which makes me very happy and looking forward to May.

53. sean - January 23, 2009

#33

“rotating barrel? phaser with only two settings? i think we’re being pranked.”

To the best of my recollection, TOS phasers had two settings: Stun and Kill. It wasn’t until later shows that phasers ended up with multiple settings.

54. Jefferies Tuber - January 23, 2009

As a kid, I’d have chosen a shuttle toy over a transporter toy.

And where’s the fun in having an Enterprise toy if you don’t have enemy ships–so you can smash them into each other? Since the Narata will at best be an out of scale toy, Playmates should have those attack ships available in the first wave.

Also a Kelvin toy that breaks into pieces… now we’re talking.

I think making the second wave unavailable until September is guaranteeing a fail. Kids want bad guys, so they can have fights. They could give a crap about cadet uniforms… they much rather have the drop suits to they can make Sulu and Kirk fly.

Am I the only guy here who remembers how to play with these toys? Imagine if Lucas had only offered toys of the good guys in 1977–with no Stormtroopers or bounty hunters. Cha!

55. Bradley1701 - January 23, 2009

I love that we have a bunch of adults commenting on toys and their opinions of them…let’s see how the kids react to them ;)

56. Imrahil - January 23, 2009

The 3-3/4″ figures look great. I still think bumpy sweater size and larger are shit, and that bridge is godawful.

57. Unreal McCoy - January 23, 2009

Enterprise looks like a little fat guy… just terrible design!

58. Paul - January 23, 2009

Has anybody seen a new Lincoln commercial of a new ’09 model that ends with a very familiar looking warp drive effect and lettering that says Starships don’t need keys? anybody? i hope i’m not dreaming but it looked cool and reminded me of the TOS HUmmer commercial from a few years back and wondered if it had anything to do with trek

59. Praetor Tal - January 23, 2009

#19

No kidding. Anyone? I think if we could see the ends of the nacelles, we’d be in business.

60. Will - January 23, 2009

So… at this point… the only things that, design wise(and assuming these toys are accurate to about 80%), it appears that the only thing they have correct in this movie will be the uniforms and Spock’s ears.

It’s really too bad, I love the role-playing toys that are released for scifi shows but jeez… there isn’t a single one here that is even worth getting. The phaser looks like a dollar store POS, the tricorder looks like what a comic book artist would draw for a character in the background, and the communicator… it looks like a bad cellphone.

The Enterprise looks better but I still hate the design. This is a better angle for the ship, though, compared to the ones we’ve seen. I guess that just goes to show that every ship has at least one angle from which is doesn’t look like garbage.

I think the bridge would’ve been fine in the movie were it not for those stupid screen things.

The action figures themselves look kind of… exactly what I would expect from playmates. A slight attempt at a correct likeness, poor proportions, and generally kind of cheap looking. The size of the body VS the heads reminds me of the small Power Rangers action figures, the heads are just slightly too small and, as such, the toy looks kind of wonky.

61. SirBroiler - January 23, 2009

Is it just me – or does that chrome Phaser just not do it? How could they go so wrong on that prop?

62. SChaos1701 - January 23, 2009

61

It’s not a prop. It’s a cheap toy. There is a difference.

63. T2 - January 23, 2009

whoa…just had a flashback…Christmas morning….early ’90s…getting the first wave of 4″ Playmates TNG crew…plus a phaser and tricorder.

really makes me wish the movie came out in Christmas…but May will do…guess I’ll just have to buy it all myself!

Really liking the phaser…

64. Mike T - January 23, 2009

They look good. Playmates really has to impress with the 3 3/4 inch figures.
Hasbro and Art Asylum have the best sculptures around. If they can at least come near that quality it’ll be great. The Enterprise is certainly a buy!

65. krikzil (aka Lixy) - January 23, 2009

Wow, lots of goodies. I’m still not sure I’m going to start collecting the new stuff but it’s good to see that Playmates is back in the game for all the new fans and kids.

66. Javi Trujillo - January 24, 2009

I might buy some of these (3 3/4) for my 4 year old son, maybe a cheap piece of trek tek, but for myself, I am planning on sticking with DST. I think they all look awful and that the uniforms don’t translate well to plastic. While I like the TOS bell bottoms, I love the look of the new boots. Not too keen on the Enterprise, although it is intriguing that it looks like it is halfway through its refit. DST is still far superior.

67. everyday_ponn_far - January 24, 2009

Enterprise in Action based on model…

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/vf-1207/Ent_in_action.jpg

68. steve623 - January 24, 2009

I can’t help but think a lot of these are going to end up on clearance by late summer or early fall, just like those Speed Racer and Indiana Jones toys were last year, so for you folks who are in love with these, a little patience will probably allow you more bang for your toy-buying buck.

69. Theoptimist - January 24, 2009

Has nobody noticed that the command chair is on a really large raised platform? Is it really that high? I did not notice this from any of the few live action photos that were released. Perhaps it raises up in battelstations mode? Not really complaining, this bridge reminds me of the look of the bridge from “The Cage” and “WNMHGB”. Not in the specific details but in color and general appearance.

70. Enterprise - January 24, 2009

OMG! In the Transporter! It”s Future Guy!

71. Valar1 - January 24, 2009

@54

I agree with you that it makes no sense to hold off more stuff until a second wave in September- unless they’re timing it to when the DVD/Blu-ray comes out.

72. John Tenuto - January 24, 2009

#54

In 1977, there were no Star Wars toys as Kenner and other companies had not predicted the success of the feature film. For Christmas, many fans got a cardboard box with a certificate to send in to Kenner for 4 action figures when they were available. It is known as the infamous empty box campaign. There were no bounty hunters in the 1977 line (the action figure of Greedo was a second line item). Playmates Toys is offering a better selection of toys. Plus, they are including Nero in each of the Star Trek categories. Thank you for the reply.

73. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - January 24, 2009

The view pf the Enterprise toy is a better angle. Anyone else find something bird-like about it? Like it’s in the middle of flapping its wings or something?

74. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - January 24, 2009

Oh, and I’ve been wondering for a while whether they could tuck the shuttle bay into that little rear area, but now I see that the shuttlebay is in the same place as always. I have to say it looks like a tight fit. (You in the back, quit your sophomoric snickering.)

75. captain_neill - January 24, 2009

I am suprised how faithful the phaser is to the original, with all the changes JJ made I was getting worried.

I still have a preference for the Diamond Select, but to me its weird seeing a kirk figure that does not look like William Shatner.

76. Cheve - January 24, 2009

All the collections are lacking some figures of generic evil minions.

otherwise, kids will only be able to play how seven federation bullies kick the butt of a poor lonely bold dude with a bitten ear.

77. Mark from Germany - January 24, 2009

#75

The new Kirk figures look more like Shatner than Pine LOL

78. Pete - January 24, 2009

Okay, so I took that image of the Big E ala JJ and Playmates, then brought it into photoshop to make an image of what it might look like on screen with an artistic flair, and here is what I came up with thanks in part to a nice space background by Greg Martin.

http://images.yuku.com/image/jpeg/8e5352d16fcdde5eee5fb7865d32dae3c0d06e7.jpg

Let me know what you think. I also have a wallpaper size of this image.

79. Driver - January 24, 2009

The unusually large transporter in the Transporter Room. Is it only for Captains? Or is it a Decontamination Chamber or transports to separate destinations? An Agony Booth?

80. John Tenuto - January 24, 2009

#78

Thanks Pete for showing how talented many fans are with your Enterprise version!

81. karanadon - January 24, 2009

#78 – Nice work!!

I’m not sure about the phaser, but I’m sold on everything else. With this and Countdown, I’m not sure if I’ll be able to wait till May, or will spontaneously combust with excitement before then…

82. Paulaner - January 24, 2009

The tricorder is really magnificent and spot-on.

83. Vulcan Soul - January 24, 2009

While the bridge and ship itself do look better from the angles presented here, I still gotta say both the set and prop design show a very weird mix of extremely retro TOS elements and comic book Galaxy Quest design. What they definitely do not show is any realism or a believable extrapolation of the future.

84. Alex - January 24, 2009

OK, I want the 3,75ers (all of them), the bridge, the transporter room, the Phaser, Tricorder, Communicator, oh… and the Enterprise, of course.

Please. :-)

85. Paulaner - January 24, 2009

#83 “What they definitely do not show is any realism or a believable extrapolation of the future.”

And I love this approach, all about suspension of disbelief and sci-fi magic. I don’t want a dark, realistic, gritty and grey universe a la Battlestar Galactica or Enterprise. The white is clearly the dominant color, and that’s a clear message from the set and props designers.

86. Devon - January 24, 2009

#67 & #78 – Those are absolutely magnificent! Any larger versions guys? I would like Wallpaper of those!

87. Kirk, James T. - January 24, 2009

Thats better, they look like cool toys – I’m really not interested in the 3 inch, playsets or role play items but looking again at those 6 inch figures, they’re not bad – they seem to be a hybrid between DST figures and Playmates mass-market figures.

What i’m worried about is that all of these will lose something when mass-produced?

I really love that Enterprise though – absolutely fantastic

88. C.S. Lewis - January 24, 2009

While it is a great improvement over the first photos, I caught a glimpse of the Enterprise photo in the corner of my eye while reading the morning’s email. For the life of me, it looked like a squid or maybe a jellyfish from a Discovery Channel documentary, with a large, bulbous head and trailing tentacles.

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

89. GO - January 24, 2009

Love the new Enterprise design, but am just as horrified as I feared I would be at the apparent loss of detail in comparison to Art Asylums’ fine ships of recent years.

No Aztec paneling. Nothing. Nada. Poof.

I look at this and think of the 1701-E produced by Playmates compared with the one produced by AA. See how much better this could have been in the right hands?

Dang.

90. Tangent - January 24, 2009

@#79

It’s a toy. I assume the large both will eject the figure, or spin around and have him fall out the back to make it appear he has “transported”. I’m almost 100% positive that massive both won’t actually be there in the movie.

As for the ship, it definitely looks better from this angle, but my only problem with it was how far back the neck connected the saucer was, which I still don’t ever see myself getting used to.

I love everything else so far..

91. Vulcan Soul - January 24, 2009

#85 That is NOT what i was saying. The color scheme got nothing to do with it, fashion is up to anyone’s guess and cannot be predicted. And for what it is worth BSG and “dark sci fi ” do not show any realistic vision of the future either, it’s just low-brow army tech of the past or present put into the future.

What I’m saying is, all of this looks very toy like and not like it is going to work. In the 1960s, many of TOS’ tech choices were prophetic, especially the flip communicator design. Even modern Trek managed to do that, with ubiquitious laptops, wall displays, handheld devices and software-programmed touch screens. Now this Trek is a step back: it combines crude designs from the 1960s, which could easily be modernized without denying the general design aesthetic, with unrealistic fairy tale elements and wants to sell that as a vision of the future to the internet generation. And that with all of Abrams’ touting how realistic this Trek is gonna be. I miss a rational “science & tech” approach here and see more of the kind of “science fantasy” approach of Star Wars here — like, who care’s if the control screens make any sense or whether that blocky tricorder is up to its supposed tasks?

92. Jim - January 24, 2009

I dunno, anyone want to venture a guess at to how well all this peripheral drek is going to sell while the economy is going down the crapper? all the belt tightening that’s going on, I’m inclined to agree with the poster who speculated it will wind up in the bargain bin by late summer.

ST has never been about “the stuff”, it’s been about the ideas, with a strong emotional appeal to the pollyanna-ish romantic in many of us that believes tomorrow will be better than today. If it doesn’t get that right, if it doesn’t first appeal to the hearts and minds of the prospective audience before it becomes the cross-marketing extravaganza that so many appear to be salivating over, then it is doomed to be another forgettable piece of fluff destined for the rubbish heap like so many over the years – anyone remember Jarid Sinn – Metalstorm? I didn’t think so…

93. screaming satellite - January 24, 2009

TOS phaser x Trek III phaser + Trek V phaser divided by TWOK phaser = New Phaser

94. Chris Pike - January 24, 2009

83. Vulcan Soul – January 24, 2009

Yes have to agree with your impressions there. The most successful bit of design here – better than nearly all previous ships – is the saucer top and upper decks, even improves on TMP version. The rear of the nacelles work nicely too, but the design all falls apart for me from where we get to the lumpy looking nacelle front ends, connecting struts and, worst of all, engineering hull/deflector and connection to the three struts. That’s probably why this angle is so much better than the view from below as seen previously.

There are issues with the production design, a strange mix of great and poor (WTH are those shower screens on the bridge!!). Compare with say recent 2 Batman films, where production design is fantastic all round.

95. Paulaner - January 24, 2009

#91 “Now this Trek is a step back: it combines crude designs from the 1960s, which could easily be modernized without denying the general design aesthetic, with unrealistic fairy tale elements and wants to sell that as a vision of the future to the internet generation.”

I see your point but this is a matter of personal taste. I like a bit of magic fairy tale fantastic unrealistic absurdity in my Trek. When I was a child a watched Trek with all that “magic” in my eyes. I never thought about realism or innovation, just magic. Now I am a grown up man and I’d like to get back those memories in a modern production.

96. Jeyl - January 24, 2009

The phaser’s barrel pivots?

Please tell me we’re not going to see security officers take a few seconds to turn their phasers on their sides and rotating the barrels to go from stun to kill and vice versa? What was wrong with a dial or button?

97. tribble - January 24, 2009

ah know i got it !

The Phaser switch pushed will switch the red and blue thingy
horizontally.
so it the blue is on top its stun –
and if the red is on top it might get e little hotter :)

lol

98. James - January 24, 2009

I still don’t 100% like the new Enterprise design, this gives me a better view but I still say the original is better. Do the friggin bussard collectors even glow red?

99. IcebreakerX - January 24, 2009

There’s clearly a lot of Enterprise-E in this Enterprise bridge. And someone watched Empire Strikes Back before they made the transporter room… Looks like a bacta tank got left behind.

Enterprise is with a better angle, but it’s still not elegant.

Tricorder looks fine, though I wonder where the screen is. But it’s a nice cross of the NX-01 scanner and the TOS tricorder.

Communicator is a bag of meh.

Phaser is a bag of hurt. This is the frakkin’ United Federation of Planets. Peaceful people. That sort of thing. Even the assault phaser was threatening in a sophisticated way. This one’s just screamin’ shoot to kill.

100. Ciarán - January 24, 2009

I love the toy of the Enterprise. I am going to be spending an absolute fortune on getting all of these!!!

101. Unbel1ever - January 24, 2009

I actually like Tricorder and Phaser. They’re quite close to the originals. Even the communicator looks open better, were it not for the tacky emblems.
Wonder why they decided the transporter chief had to have a place to sit now.

The bridge playset lacks walls. Although it probably looks better that way, because it doesn’t have these ugly white panels and IKEA lights.

102. Refugee of Quark's - January 24, 2009

I glanced at the pic of Kirk in the Warp Collection and thought he was holding a cigarette at first.

103. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - January 24, 2009

Ok. Im about to geek out. II want those and i want the Phaser and Tricorder and The Big E. it all looks Great and will go with my Collection of Trek I already have. I am So hyped for the NEw Movie and Have plans to see it at Midnight then Dream about it and see it again the next day and then Again. I seen trek 2 8 times as a Kid and now im going to Beat that Record and see this at least 10 Times.

104. Al Hartman - January 24, 2009

#75 – You are another one who needs glasses.

This weapon looks nothing like the classic Phaser. It looks like a generic dime store toy.

Here’s what a real Phaser looks like:

http://www.hms-studios.com/roddenberry/jheusel_buildups/STTOSHMSPhaser2.jpg

There’s no resemblence. It looks more like this:

http://www.yourprops.com/view_item.php?movie_prop=13294

The Nebulizer from Galaxy Quest.

105. JB - January 24, 2009

I like the look of the Kelvin better than the E – it has the right combination of classic design and modern detailing. The E, on the other hand, clearly has elements from Star Wars Episode I in it. It just doesn’t have the same ‘feel’ as the Kelvin.

106. Al Hartman - January 24, 2009

#101 – The Tricorder and Phaser look nothing like the originals.

Phaser:

http://www.roddenberry.com/props/prop-replicas/tos-phaser-ii-prop-built.html

Tricorder:

http://www.roddenberry.com/props/prop-replicas/tos-tricorder-prop-built.html

No resemblence to the toys above. Zip, zero, nada.

“Engineers… They love to changes things!”
— McCoy (ST:TMP)

107. Al Hartman - January 24, 2009

#105 – I like the Kelvin too. If the Enterprise in the new movie had looked more like the Kelvin, I’d have liked it.

108. WhatInBlueBlazes?! - January 24, 2009

While I’m really not crazy about the chrome finish (yet again, I find myself in complete agreement with Mr. Sternbach!), I do think that the overall shape of the phaser is a reasonably faithful update of the original.

If we ignore the rotating barrel (which I’ll have to see in action before I judge it), I see it as an updated fusion of the phasers used in the Original Series, The Search For Spock, and The Undiscovered Country. To me, it looks most like TSFS phaser — particularly in the angled hilt, the piece that sweeps over the beam emitter, and the overall angular, almost aggressive shape.

Come to think of it, the rotating barrel is reminiscent of the weapons from the Original Series pilot episodes.

Overall, I like it.

109. WhatInBlueBlazes?! - January 24, 2009

#104 —

I’ll admit, a certain resemblance to the Nebulizer is undeniable. That’s to be expected, though, when Galaxy Quest was so clearly meant to parallel (and not quite parody) Star Trek.

110. Unbel1ever - January 24, 2009

#106

Of course, they don’t look exactly like them. That would be ridiculous. The toys also don’t look exactly like the props. That would really be an embarrassment for the prop makers.
I see close similarities to this model from ST V.
http://freenet-homepage.de/Arzaryn/bilder/waffen/phaser2startrek5.gif

As for the tricorder: you want a little tv screen ? Really ?

#105

ack

111. SDK - January 24, 2009

After whining about the first Playmates pix. I must say that the 12″ Spock Prime looks to be a good head sculpt. Chris Pine’s Kirk seems to be giving them a difficult time though.

I know it’s a big money saver for these toy companies to use standardized body molds for all the characters of the same gender, but still it’d be nice to get some of the physical idiosyncrasies in there. That’s what always annoyed me about Shatner’s Kirk figures; rarely seemed like his body.

112. KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!! - January 24, 2009

Love it all, can’t wait for the movie! My 15yo daughter is even excited about the move. I think they’ve done a great job of tying in the old, and refreshing for a new generation of fans. (LOVE the new E, BTW). I hope the haters also remember that all is probably not as it seems. I, for one, am holding judgement till I see the move, and CAN’T FRIGGIN WAIT!

113. lostrod - January 24, 2009

Overall, the items look nice and, given the ‘alternate timeline’ plot, should fit nicely.

However, I still don’t quite get the bridge. Seems awfully cluttered, even allowing for toy scale. Why does it appear to have lights on the floor?

I’ve never understood sci fi designs that have light coming up or back at someone. Example: tables that are lit up (if you put anything on it, it would be a silhouete). Or space helmets with lights on the inside (ever try to drive at night with the car interior lights on?)

I realize the lights inside the helmet are probably just so the audience can see the paid actor inside, but it doesn’t make much sense from a practical standpoint.

114. Mark - January 24, 2009

I’ve had many moments when I said, “Well, that’s not what I expected, but okay…”. Seeing the phaser earlier this week was the first time when I thought, “Okay, this just doesn’t look right.” Anthony, I’m glad you confirmed that the actual props will not have the same shiny finish. Looking at it is a more flat or metallic grey, or even black (we could wish!) changes the way it looks very much for the better

115. Bryan - January 24, 2009

I shot my mouth off too early; the pictures of the 6″ figures look significantly better than the Kirk prototype from last week. The texture effect on the shirts still strikes me as awkward, but these figures are okay.

116. Dr. Image - January 24, 2009

I’d like to know if the “props” are 1:1, or horribly over or undersize, as has been the case with all Playmates crap.

#7 Rick- Yeah. Hit it with something like good ol’ Plastikote 7179 or 7173. Or, duh- Krylon Shadow Gray!

117. Captain Dunsel - January 24, 2009

#92 “ST has never been about “the stuff”, it’s been about the ideas…”

I’m sure we’d all like to believe that, but I’m pretty sure that Gene Roddenberry would have marketed the hell out of Star Trek “stuff” like these toys if he could have. (Read up on the origins of the “IDIC” in ST:TOS, if you don’t already knowthe story.) The Great Bird of the Galaxy just didn’t take the concept that far.

Years later, Geogre Lucas and a little thing called “Star Wars” changed that about Hollywood forever.

Now we know, in the words of Yogurt, that the real money is in “Moichendising!”

Let’s hear it for “Star Trek – The Flamethrower”

118. Third Remata'Klan - January 24, 2009

The likenesses are much better on the bigger figures.

And that Enterprise….

Okay, I wasn’t thrilled with the first shot of the actual thing released before the trailer….

But I think that toy looks GORGEOUS!!! Well done!

119. LordCheeseCakeBreath - January 24, 2009

I’ve come to really love the Enterprise. it does pay attention to the original. The bridge really looks awful. I hate it actually. I like the idea of the view screen also being a window. It makes sense to have the bridge on top.

Very disappointed with this bridge.

120. Viking - January 24, 2009

I dunno…..those warp nacelles still seem too damn close together to me……

121. Capt. of the USS Anduril - January 24, 2009

While I’m disappointed in the lack of detail on the Enterprise when compared to the Ent-E and TWOK 1701 that I have from Diamond Select, it does look better than Playmates’ previous ships. For one thing, the nacelle pylons seem to be permanently molded to the hull, which always bugged me about the TOS Enterprise. The pylons do look a bit chunky, but Playmates has done that before and will continue to do it. Also, it seems that the pennants and name and registry # are PAINTED ON! That was one thing about the Playmates stuff I couldn’t stand, I hated putting on stickers, especially on the bland, no points of reference, bleach-white hull of the TOS Enterprise. Now, it could just be that the painted on parts are for the prototype/show off model only, and if that is the case, it will be just an anonymous Constitution-class starship above my TV. While not the best quality they’ve ever done(ie The Enterprise-D was near perfection), this isn’t the worst ship ever(ie The First Contact Enterprise-E). Verdict is still out on the props until I see the size since Playmates always either undersized or oversized the props, but I will definitely be buying that Enterprise come April.

122. Thomas Jensen - January 24, 2009

This stuff could be for almost any sci-fi movie. Very modern, very sleek, but none of it reminds me of the original props, which, could have been used just as well as these in the new film. Perhaps slightly updated, but recognizable. These will do just fine for the new movie, but I’m not into any of it.

123. Fox - January 24, 2009

Woow! Excelent action figures!!!

I like the new red color of the T-Shirts.

FOXXXXXX

124. Anthony Pascale - January 24, 2009

I want to remind folks that the above items are toys, not replicas. There are differences with the actual items in the real movie. Although it is perfectly fair to use the above to assess the toys coming from Playmates, for those wanting to pass judgment on the real things (ships, wardrobe, props, etc), you may want wait until Paramount releases more images, video, etc.

There is a reason why companies charge hundreds of dollars for replicas, compared to the above which are priced for kids and for play.

125. Jon - January 24, 2009

These are all really fantastic.

The Enterprise toy looks just great. While I am absolutely certain there will be more detailed ‘build your own’ kits available, it looks good quality eitherway.

I love the selection of dolls/figures that are available, certainly glad there is a range right through 6″ bash em about hard plastic figures through to good sized quality collectors dolls. It is great to see all of this come together.

126. SChaos1701 - January 24, 2009

#124

THANK YOU!!!!

127. Lord Garth, Formerly Of Izar - January 24, 2009

Found this over at Screen rant

This makes me hate the new ship even more sorry but there is no spinning it I F-ing hate it

see this blueprint comparison with the TMP E

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z138/bearsturf/enterprise-comparison.jpg

And thanks to Vic and the wondeful Screenrant

128. James - January 24, 2009

127, holy crap they are too close together. Man what a shit.

129. Closettrekker - January 24, 2009

#127—Still not hating it…and to me, the need to “spin it” implies a problem that isn’t really there for me.

IMO, the Enterprise was little more than a vehicle to get my favorite characters from point A to point B. It was those iconic characters which made her special.

I have no problem seeing this as a 23rd Century starship. I do think it looks more like the movie-era Enterprise than the original TOS design, but I never expected otherwise.

The question, to me, is not whether people like us will suddenly fall in love with this design over the one to which we have long since become accustomed—-but whether new fans (without that frame of reference) will be able to accept this as something which might exist some 250 or so years from now.
That question cannot be answered with a still shot or diagram. The answer will come when the World sees this ship in action!

130. thenewK2 - January 24, 2009

#124…”There is a reason why companies charge hundreds of dollars for replicas, compared to the above which are priced for kids and for play.”

Anthony, what you said is true of all of the toy companies, but one…Art Asylum made extremely accurate replicas of the Star Trek props that are nearly as accurate as the Master Replicas, for a fraction of the MR price.

There isn’t any reason why a smaller toy company like Art Asylum CAN produce accuracy at a very affordable price and a huge toy company like Playmates CAN NOT. It comes down to how much these licensees actually care to do them right.

The only compromises they make is in not caring enough. From the designers to the management, if they can whip it together and slap a Star Trek delta shield on it, it’s good enough, in their eyes. Which is why the old Classic Playmates Star Trek props suck next to the Art Asylum props…because AA really cared to do them right, for once and Playmates didn’t care as much…and they were the same price as the Art Asylum versions.

Unfortunately, toy companies aren’t always filled with the most detail oriented designers or management that actually care about accuracy. To many of them, it’s just a job that ends at 5PM. The companies who grant the licenses have a department that has to constantly struggle to squeeze the most amount of accuracy and detail out of these toy companies, who are in a struggle to get away with something that passes off as a toy, but they could do them right, right from the start.

For the most part, these new trek figures look decent. As I said in previous posts, at least they spent the money on the molds to make them posable and small enough to make a decent bridge.

131. GO - January 24, 2009

#130: hear, hear!

132. Kirk, James T. - January 24, 2009

130 – Art Asylum are a small company that went bust because of Star Trek – Diamond Select Toys came in and saved it – and the reason their toys are at a better level of detail and accuracy is because they don’t make as much.

Playmates is a huge company who produces a huge number of toys – to do that they have to make toys at an affordable price.

You want high end replica’s then there are a lot of other companies out there that will be producing Star Trek movie items.

as far as toys go – these aren’t bad – not great but no different from any other child’s play thing.

133. SupremeDalekOnTheBridge - January 24, 2009

Please give details of Worldwide info, details in Dollars, Target and Toys R us are useless tidbits to an Irish fan!!!!!

134. Jeff Bond - January 24, 2009

Well, I think we have a consensus! HONK!!

Isn’t it patently obvious that no matter what the design work in this movie looked like, 50% of the people on this board would hate it enough to make them spew four-letter words like drunken sailors?

I don’t love all of it but I’m not ANGRY about it. I agree, looking at a static image of the Enterprise, it seems a mix of design sensibilities–which it is, because it must retain the basic elements of Matt Jefferies’ design and be reinterpreted by Ryan Church, a guy whose style is 180 degrees from Jefferies’. But having seen the ship in action I can say it looks great onscreen (there’s at least one thing I noticed in the footage which was that the warp nacelles have large “masts” or antennae of some kind on top of them–this is not reflected in the toy and I don’t know if these details unfurl in specific situations but I distinctly remember them in at least one shot). I really like the look of the warp engine fronts–very similar to Church’s War of the Worlds war machine heads with different proportions.

The phaser does look more “gun metal” in the movie–you can see that there is a two-tone chrome look to the toy with the upper half of the gun a darker color, but it is not dark enough to look like what’s in the movie. And the barrel switch IS done with a button or something, it is not hand adjusted–it still strikes me as impractical but I do like that they retained the proportions and look of the original phasers. And honestly, there have always been props and design pieces in the Trek movies and TV shows that have rubbed me the wrong way–it is always a mixed bag (I hated the TNG phasers for one thing) yet I’ve never seen the level of anger over things like this that I’ve seen with this project. It’s only a movie and if you want stuff to just look exactly like TOS watch New Voyages–I am thoroughly enjoying seeing the whole thing reinterpreted.

135. SPOCKBOY - January 24, 2009

#127
Nice work Vic and Screen Rant.
It is definitely the back end of the ship that gives me grief. The nacelles look like they could snap off in a second. Considering that they are actually DRIVING the ship, it wouldn’t be practical and it just plain doesn’t look good.

Okay I’m all GEEKED out now.
peace.

: )

136. thenewK2 - January 24, 2009

#132 “Art Asylum are a small company that went bust because of Star Trek – Diamond Select Toys came in and saved it”

Because of Star Trek? When you make a statement like that, please quantify it with facts. I don’t know if you are aware of the difficulty there is in getting a comic book (produced by anyone other than the Big Four or Five comic companies) on the shelf of your local comic book shop, let alone getting a toy line on the shelves of TRU. TRU OWNS the toy industry, in that they alone decide whether they are going to carry something or not. I’ve worked on entire lines of toys that went through the entire process from design to finished, packaged models ready to go on the shelf and TRU refused the order so they got taken out in the ocean and dumped. Just as Diamond owns the comic distribution channels, If you don’t pay, you don’t play.

” – and the reason their toys are at a better level of detail and accuracy is because they don’t make as much.”

You don’t have any idea what you are talking about. If Art Asylum made fewer of them they would cost more…period. Conversely, Playmates HAS the budget to make them accurate from the start. It comes down to do they care too or not. I can tell you from personal experience, being a fan and a designer will get you the title of GEEK in these toy companies. Over and over again, I told the management of the company I was working for that Lucasfilm wouldn’t approve of the lack of detail they wanted to put forth on the toys they were producing and was laughed at and told “I’m a “fan” and I pay too much attention to detail”, only to have the people at Lucasfilm shoot their poorly detailed designs down and force them to redo them.

“Playmates is a huge company who produces a huge number of toys – to do that they have to make toys at an affordable price.”

Wrong, again. They have the budget to do them accurately from the start…way more of a budget than Art Asylum has. For goodness sakes, most of these props and things are designed on a computer…there are computer files available from the licensor that would require almost no tooling other than to send it to an SAS machine, match pantone colors, slap in a pre-recorded soundFX chip…DONE!

I love it when people who don’t know what they are talking about chime in with a totally opposite views, just to oppose someone who does know what they are saying. You can believe what you want. I just told you the facts.

137. OneBuckFilms - January 24, 2009

Art Asylum has raised the bar pretty damn high with their Replica/Toys (Phaser, Communicator, and soon Tricorder and WOK Phaser).

But the Phaser, Communicator and Tricorder look pretty good. I mean, it is a $17 toy. It will NOT be accurate to the point of a $30-$50 toy/replica, nor a $200-$500 replica from Master Replicas or Roddenberry.com.

We’ll see how accurate they are when we see more of the props in the movie and in stills and clips, but I’m happy to see the mass market appeal being anticipated.

138. Topaz172 - January 24, 2009

They may only be toy versions, but even the props that were photo’d just don’t look ‘functional’

The phaser in particular looks a cross between those from Galaxy Quest and Flash Gordon (the movie).

whatever else, the props and enterprise design are a massive dropping of the ball

139. Chris Pike - January 24, 2009

127. Lord Garth, Formerly Of Izar – January 24, 2009

I don’t hate it, but there’s no doubt at all that the new E could, no should, have been much much better…

140. C.S. Lewis - January 24, 2009

Dear Jeff Bond,

It’s only natural that older fans, with a lifetime of familiarity with the old design aesthetic would be bothered at some level by these reimagined designs. It is the same reaction with Bowdlerized songs and stories, butchered at the hands of politically correct revisionists. “New is better” is an artifact of Madison Avenue — not a diktat from our Maker, after all!

There is also the need for an imaginary item to at least mimic the laws of nature and mechanics in order to suspend disbelief. The many protuberances on the Phaser seem impractical for a sidearm, as I mentioned above. The redesigned ship looks almost biological instead of engineered, with its phallic engine pods and its odd curves and angles.

This in turn jangles the sensibilities of the same set of older fans, since it more closely resembles science fiction properties such as Aliens, Predator, and X-Files that deliberately want to look “ookie” than Star Trek’s no nonsense “This is US Navy technology extrapolated 200 years into the future”.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.

Sincerely,

C.S. Lewis

141. jeffery wright - January 24, 2009

even this baby had more than two settings:

http://www.phasers.net/2260/1laser21.jpg

this one as well (an excellent sidearm design, too):

http://www.phasers.net/2150/pp-cs01.jpg

and look ma! no rotating barrels…

142. THE GOVERNATOR - January 24, 2009

127: Lord Garth, Formerly Of Izar

That drawing of the new Enterprise is not totally accurate. The nacelles are correct, but they go over their supports more and are not leaning on the edge. Also, there’s a slight proportion problem not only between the saucer and the rest of the ship but between the TOS-refit design and the new ship. It’s a good drawing, but don’t count on it for comparison purposes.

143. THE GOVERNATOR - January 24, 2009

Oh, and the nacelles are slightly longer than they are in that drawing.

144. Chris H - January 24, 2009

Hard sell or what? Ewwww.

145. Lord Garth, Formerly Of Izar - January 24, 2009

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

A very tubby person ate almost half of the secondary hull. Sorry, at least it’s profile, looks aweful. It’s not the primary hull or interestenting connecting dorsal or even the interesting engines that many agree look pretty good. It’s the overall design, it’s the way it does not flow, and the way the secondary hull looks half eaten and the way the secondary hull looks too scrunched far backconnected to the secondary hull. Yes elements are good but the Jeffries and Probert-abel designs flow throughout. Not one part here or one part there the whole damn thing looks good. This, kiddies, does not

146. G - January 24, 2009

So… Where’s the removable hand phaser??

147. Pete - January 24, 2009

Here is the requested wallpaper size.

http://www.redshirtsbrigade.com/XI1701.jpg

Enjoy!

148. G - January 24, 2009

And… No gold antenna grid?

And, what’s with the lower portion of the communicator, the circle under the big ‘eyeball’? It’s just a plain circle with a bunch of grooves/cuts? That’s the best ‘feature’ they could come up with? Sorry, but just give me 3 plain old red, green & blue LED’s any day of the week over THAT.

149. S. John Ross - January 24, 2009

They got the Yelchin and Urban likenesses down good. If I end up seeing and liking the film, I may get me a McCoy :)

Pegg, Cho, and Saldana came across halfway decent.

… but while this is better than what we saw before, Pine and Quinto are left out in the cold. Maybe Pine really _is_ suited to play Kirk, since one of the true qualities of Shatnerism is being impossible to sculpt in toy form :/

150. MrAtoz - January 24, 2009

I really like the fact that NONE of it appeals to me.
It’s going to do wonders for my bank account.

151. YARN - January 24, 2009

New ship looks worse from this angle.

Oversized nacelles with odd caps. Stubby connecting struts have no grace.

Yuck.

152. Can't Wait for May 2008 - January 24, 2009

Im really liking the new Enterprise design. To me this Enterprise really looks like something that is built to explore strange new worlds but something that can defend it self. The way the 2ndnry hull looks a lot more muscular. I love the fact that the neck has some meat on it. I think back to “Wrath of Khan,” and how it looked that if Reliant hit that neck anymore the neck was going to snap off. Now im in no way putting down the original design, I love it but I like this design has well. I can not wait to get a hold of this new Enterprise. The thing I keep on wondering about is are the ramscoops, are they going to be red, blue or clear?

153. LoyalStarTrekFan - January 24, 2009

Once again Trek fans seem to either love or hate the new designs. Just remember a few things:

1) They are Playmates TOYS designed to basically look like the props used in the film.

2) Many times Playmates releases a color scheme on a toy and the final product has a different color scheme.

3) Props in a film aren’t half as important as the plot.

4) This is Sci-Fi, not Science Fact.

As for the Phaser not looking like what guns will look like in the future well, you would know this how, have you been to the future? Watch “Future Weapons” on the Discovery Channel and you will see some radical designs on weapons. And those weapons featured on the show are all the type of weapons we use now, projectile weapons, not energy weapons that are used in Star Trek and other sci-fi shows.

A couple people have commented that the Phaser looks like something that you can pick up at a cheap toy store. Perhaps some elements are but overall the Phaser looks like a combination of the Star Trek III and VI Phasers. Just my opinion.

Someone said “they look nothing like the originals.” That was to be expected. At least the props/toys look like they belong in the 23rd Century and not the 24th Century, which is a very good thing. I was concerned that the props would look so advanced that the belonged in the 24th century or later and I’m happy that they look more primitive than 24th century designs but more advanced than TOS designs. So overall, I’m happy with them.

One final note, someone discussed the bitterness when it comes to this movie. I agree that there is too much bitterness. Calm down people. Relax, take a breath, and then discuss you point of view in a calm and rational manner please.

154. Cheve - January 24, 2009

As an entertainer in the spanish conventions, I have to say:

The shirts of this movie are very hard to replicate because of the deltas in the fabric.

I want an “M” sized “roleplaying toy” of the shirt and the undershirt to go with the utility belt, the faser, the tricorder and the comunicator.

BTW, the boots also seem hard to find.

155. G - January 24, 2009

I’m not bitter at all, I’m excited for the movie. But, the little things like “a gold antenna grid” shouldn’t be a problem that had to be changed. It wouldn’t look any more or less primitive/futuristic than what they have on this new design. It would just be ‘recognizable’. It’s the same as if they didn’t put the insignia on their shirts, or if their shirts weren’t made with the same colors, for example. That wouldn’t be recognizable. The communicator.. unless it has something to do with the plot, I don’t see why it needs to look so drastically different.

I’m not bitter.. I’m just sayin’.

156. G - January 24, 2009

But, then again, the bridge looks ‘drastically’ different, too, so it probably does have something specific to do with the plot.

157. MrAtoz - January 24, 2009

Yes, this is where Nero alters the time line which effectively transforms the Enterprise into a Bed and Breakfast in space. The bridge becomes a spa/hair salon… (as you can see by the photos supplied by Playmates)

158. McCoy - January 24, 2009

So aside from the uniforms, it looks as though we can conclude that if there was any one plan with art direction, it was to pull visuals from all of Trek, not just the TOS era. Or rather, TNG plus TOS. Even if this is the result of time travel (Nimoy giving TNG technology to TOS), I still don’t see how we are revisiting that era, if the only thing left to visit is character names and (partially) the uniforms. Visually, is is “new” Trek.

Oh, and bout the big E. It was sold as something more than a vehicle to get characters from point A to point B. The only thing in the opening credits was the Enterprise, no other characters. Plus, the opening always told us “these are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise.” Not the voyages of Kirk, Spock and McCoy. Kirk always indicated how important it was to “save the ship”. In TMP, we had one of the greatest “geek” moments in film history with Kirk gazing at 1701-A for the first time. It’s much, much, more than just another tech gadget. It was the first, it was a major part of the TOS era, and the creators of the new film missed their change at homage on so many levels. The missed it on the ship, the bridge, and now the phaser, tricorder and communicator. No black, no gold.

as usual, IMO

159. Unbel1ever - January 24, 2009

158. McCoy – January 24, 2009

Completely agree. Except it still was the 1701 in TMP… no A.

160. OneBuckFilms - January 24, 2009

155 – The Communicator, Phaser and Tricorder SHOULD look different, to match the whole Starfleet aesthetic in the movie.

Kind of Apple/Art Deco/50s aesthetic. The old props on the new set would look out of place.

161. McCoy - January 24, 2009

OMG…I’m probably not the first to see this, but the Galaxy Quest phaser looks like this new phaser…and the GQ communicator resembles this communicator…

http://gallery.me.com/damccoy#100156/galquest_st&bgcolor=black

The new stuff resembles GQ much more than it does TOS. LOL!

162. G - January 24, 2009

Yeah, no bloody A, B, C, OR.. D

163. G - January 24, 2009

Well, I guess we’re forgetting how different TMP made them look.. ugly-ass jumpsuits, wrist communicators (no gold antenna or chirp). I guess you could kind of look at that as a disappointment to fans, hoping to see and hear familiar things in the first big screen picture.

164. G - January 24, 2009

Next thing you know, they’re gonna have Tribbles without fur. Then the shit’s REALLy gonna hit the fan.

165. McCoy - January 24, 2009

Yup . Sorry. 104 has the Galaxy Quest goods…

166. Kev-1 - January 24, 2009

Most of this looks good, although whether or not kids will buy it depends on the film. Star trek is not Star Wars, is more complicated, and does not easily lend itself to good/evil battles. But the toys look good. That revolving phaser barrel seems impractical, as if they were thinking of toys first during the design process. Suppose Kirk and Spock are next to each other and the rotation mechanism sticks or is blocked– the thing could fire sideways. Oops! Keep an oil kit handy.

167. Kev-1 - January 24, 2009

Yeah, it probably has a thingy that prevent its from firing out of position– in which case it would not fire at all– problem #2.

168. McCoy - January 24, 2009

I’m all up for reinterpretations of “Trek” designs. I just don’t think a movie about where it all started was the place to make these changes. These gadgets/ship are not taking me back (or forward for that matter). I just get the feeling that it’s just “here’s our take on stuff”.

169. Kirk's Girdle - January 24, 2009

Here’s a link to the Narada toy.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zathrasknowz/3217878284/sizes/o/in/photostream/

170. Benjamin Adams - January 24, 2009

The texturing of the uniform shirts looks like crap on all the Enterprise outfit figures, regardless of their scale. If you were to take the real shirts and shrink them down that small, they would just look like regular fabric, like the old Mego figures. Ugh.

171. Stanky McFibberich - January 24, 2009

re: 168. McCoy – January 24, 2009
“I’m all up for reinterpretations of “Trek” designs. I just don’t think a movie about where it all started was the place to make these changes. These gadgets/ship are not taking me back (or forward for that matter). I just get the feeling that it’s just “here’s our take on stuff”.”

There’s some truth in that.

172. Rick Sternbach - January 24, 2009

The stuff of mine that Playmates produced yielded a mixed bag of nicely proportioned and detailed to oddly proportioned and less detailed; I suppose it depended on who was running the campaign and whether the stuff was for play or display. The Klingon Attack Cruiser and Voyager came out quite nice, copying the details from the injection kits for the most part (my Playmates contact admitted that they usually waited for Revell or Ertl to strike first). DS9 was okay, with some bad soft-vinyl parts that were done soft to perhaps prevent little kid eye-pokes? The first Type II phaser was also okay, though the red lite-up nose was more toy-like than I’d have liked; ah well. The TNG tricorder was very well done; very well proportioned and with a nice set of sounds. The cricket phaser was bizarre, as was the DS9 Runabout and the little TNG Shuttlecraft; had to put those action figures somewhere, eh? I haven’t seen much else beyond those few toys, except maybe in passing in the store. Should be interesting what comes out in the next few months.

173. captain_neill - January 24, 2009

I am sticking with Diamond Select figures as they are proper Star Trek.

I will prob love this new film but not in the same light

174. fred - January 24, 2009

That Narada is one weird ship… it looks like a Klingon tribble.

175. McCoy's Gall Bladder - January 24, 2009

Why couldnt they have had toys this cool when I was a kid?

Back then we had to use our imaginations.

176. fred - January 24, 2009

And this whole line of complaints that “they look like Galaxy Quest.” Well, duh… Everything in GQ was made to resemble ST! It’s like saying “oh, no, the communicator looks like a cell phone! Yeah, the cell phone was based on the flip-top design. You people are running around in circles. If you ever do catch your tail you’ll be griping because you bit yourself.

177. McCoy's Gall Bladder - January 24, 2009

Yep yep yep

I wish I was a little kid again.

I still say the nacelles are built wrong. The shuttlebay is exposed to radiation.

If they had wanted to redesign the old bird so much they could have gone with the Decatur/Belknap design.

178. cellojammer - January 24, 2009

Gotta say, I don’t love what I’ve seen of that phaser. There are too many fins and doohickies all over it, and the rotating emitter feature is just silly.

The communicator? I can live with it.

The tricorder is pretty cool.

I like the bridge a lot more now that we’ve got a view of the entire thing albeit in toy form.

The ship is OK. I can live with it even if I don’t adore it. The nacelles are too close together.

But having said that, the designs won’t make or break the movie for me. Bring it on!

179. thomoz - January 24, 2009

comment on #9:

“grid – January 23, 2009

now from this angle, the new enterprise looks fantastic:

http://trekmovie.com/images/merchandise/pmst09/Enterprise_HiRes2%20Rev.jpg

too bad we saw that awkward side view with the shuttle in front first.
the more angles we see it from, the better it looks.”

I still find the alteration to the original’s lower fuselage and engine-struts
a bit jarring, but I am getting used to it I suppose. The alteration
of the ship is the one aspect of this new movie’s visuals that i am having the most trouble with.

180. Kirk, James T. - January 24, 2009

I really hope we see some really high end collectable pieces from this movie – Master Replicas and Corgi doing props and Die-Cast Ships and Hot Toys – they have blown me sideways with their Dark Knight figures – £99.00 – i’d gladly pay that rather than the £30 for the pretty well done 12 inch Playmates versions.

Bob Orci if your listening, seriously, Hot Toys! awesome company :D

181. New Horizon - January 24, 2009

I still don’t like the design of this Enterprise…and it’s not because it’s different…it’s just a bad design. It doesn’t feel like a cohesive idea, it’s a patchwork of so many design styles. It’s distracting to look at. The saucer doesn’t match the secondary hull or the nacelle’s…it feels like it was drawn by a dozen different people. Too many cooks. It’s just plain ugly. No offense to Ryan Church.

182. Unbel1ever - January 24, 2009

Don’t know, wether it’s already been posted somewhere here, but there’s a guy at trekbbs, who’s done a 3d model of the new E. You can check out different angles.

http://trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=73529&page=27

183. TIAKO - January 24, 2009

#176

THANK YOU FRED!!!!!!!!!!!!

184. Jim - January 24, 2009

re: 168 – all I can say is Amen brother, Amen.

185. G - January 24, 2009

Narada looks like a porcupine running at the speed of light through a thorn bush.

186. doubting thomas - January 24, 2009

i like the tricorder. it seems like a good design for a post-enterprise, pre-original design. although i hope it doesn’t actuallyu have the word “tricorder” on it in the movie

the communicator’s a decent design, but this one’s better:

youtube.com/watch?v=3z7-vkgIeB8

the phaser is pathetic, a parody prop. they diddn’t even look closely enough at the original to notice the type one attatched. i can ignore that if they’re going for an alternate timeline. they cannot claim that this is in the same timeline as the other shows and films, though i see no reason why they couldn’t have made it so.

187. RD - January 24, 2009

#106. Yes, engineers do indeed LOVE to CHANGE things.

Well, that bridge is a mess. I wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy. But at least everybody has a seat now. Plus a few extra seats. God knows what all those new posts on the bridge do now. I suspect one of them is the “Genius Bar”.

But, I think I’ve figured it out. Using Orci’s psuedo-bullsh*t theory, in this universe the Enterprise went through a refit after The Cage and ended up looking like the iBridge we see in this movie. However, in WNMHGB, you’ll note Scotty’s presence. He hated the new re-fit and retro-fit the entire Enterprise when he took command, a penchant alluded to by he and Picard when he chose the 1701 bridge for the holodeck recreation in TNG “Relics”. Something he was not able to do in this movie because the timeline has been changed and Scotty arrives on the Enterprise well before he was assigned to it. So see, it all makes sense now. In TOS, the Enterprise did go through an Apple Store era, between the Cage and WNMHGB. As far as we know, the Enterprise is the only ship to have this fcuk-ed up iBridge ad Scotty will eventually return it to it’s simpler Cage-era glory. Even if other ships in the fleet have it too, since the Enterprise is the flagship, all the other engineers took a page from Scotty’s book and retro-fit theirs as well. See, it’s all so simple when you think 4th dimensionally!

Now to another problem … how exactly does Scotty become the chief engineer unless the Enterprise’s is killed just like in Voyager?

188. Dr. Image - January 24, 2009

#124- Anthony- With all due respect, at least an off-the-shelf- AA phaser was worthy of screen time as brandished by Scott Bacula in STE’s “In a Mirror Darkly, Pt. 2.” (And now it’s canon!)
Not only do Playmates, interpretations of props lean (well, obviously) toward the toylike interpretation, but the present designs themselves leave (again, obviously) much to be desired from the loyal Trek fan.
But again, let’s see them on screen.
The fat lady will have then sung.

189. cellojammer - January 24, 2009

If production design were the end all and be all for a show, I would have hated TNG because the ships, shuttles, phasers, tricorders and uniforms just didn’t do anything for me. I particularly loathed the E-D but grew to love her. I stuck with the show and was richly rewarded by some great characters and memorable stories. It’s my hope that the same will apply here.

190. LoyalStarTrekFan - January 24, 2009

172, I noticed that. My parents gave me the Playmates Voyager toy for one of my birthdays when I was kid and it was excellently detailed. The Ent-E from FC and INS were very inaccurate. I thought that the FC and INS Phasers came out well though. In fact, all the TNG Type II Phasers came off well, IMO.

191. LoyalStarTrekFan - January 24, 2009

To everyone who says “the props look like Galaxy Quest.”

I must disagree. The Phaser looks more like movie-era Phasers. Neither the Phaser nor the other props look like anything out of Galaxy Quest. Just my humble opinion.

192. LoyalStarTrekFan - January 24, 2009

172, I thought the Type I hand Phaser or “Cricket Phaser” was way too big. Is this an accurate statement?

193. Anthony Pascale - January 24, 2009

RE: kirk’s girdle Narada
as stated in the article, that is not the narada toy, it isn’t even designed yet.

RE: AA v Playmates
I am not going to get into a whole thing about these two companies and what they do, I will leave that to John and others, however the notion that ‘Playmates don’t care’ is absurd. I ahve spoken to them, they are very excited and they are fans. Things are not always as simple as you might thing. but my real point is that the above items are toys, not replicas and for you to wait to see the real things to pass judgment on the FILM…that is my point.

194. Wes - January 24, 2009

Is that Nimoy as old Spock, or Barack Obama as old Vulcan? LOL! Typical playmates! My question is: will that the bridge and transporter set will be operable without those extra pieces?

195. johnny - January 24, 2009

WHO DOES NOT GET THE CONSEPT OF AN ALTERNATE TIME LINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

196. McCoy - January 24, 2009

I disagree with the idea that it was inevitable that the new Star Trek gadgets would look like Galaxy Quest, simply because Galaxy Quest’s were based on TOS. The point is, The new gadgets should look like TOS, not GQ.

I never paid attention to the GQ phaser before today…but have to say I like it better than the new Trek phaser in every way:

1) looks more like an update to the TOS phaser
2) looks more “futuristic”
3) looks cool—not generic

The Trek movie gadgets should, at a minimum, be black like TOS.

197. McCoy - January 24, 2009

195: “WHO DOES NOT GET THE CONSEPT OF AN ALTERNATE TIME LINE!”

Even though they are calling this an alternate timeline (and BTW, they should absolutely NOT have gone down that road), they should have designed the gadgets and vehicles closer to TOS to help transport us back to that era visually. They did it with the uniforms, they should have done it with everything else.

198. ShawnP - January 24, 2009

182. Unbel1ever

Those 3D models are awesome looking. Thanks for posting the link.

199. Dr. Image - January 24, 2009

Ok. You want to see good alternate phaser design?
Look here: http://www.xscapesprops.com/Valkyrie_Props.htm
THAT is how great a minor tweak to an iconic design can work if it’s done right.
(Hats off, Scott.)

200. cpelc - January 24, 2009

182 –

I borrowed the 3d model design and attempted to make an updated TOS intro screen

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b158/pelcj/newent.jpg

201. McCoy - January 24, 2009

Just a “hopeful” idea from the bridge playset. If you “close off” the area behind the glass panels, the bridge would be smaller and just about back to the size of the original TOS bridge.

Is it possible that one of the tie-ins with ‘Enterprise’ are a time cops? Who came to the TOS era, helped equip the Enterprise for time travel? It would be so top secret that it had to be built in Iowa away from the rest of Star Fleet operations. At the end of the film, the time cops dismantle the E’s time capability, reducing the size of the bridge (adding the panels back) and thereby altering the the Big E back to a much more TOS-centric shape.

Who is that figure up front in the black outfit?

http://gallery.me.com/damccoy#100164/Picture-202&bgcolor=black

202. OM - January 24, 2009

…Heh, I can see a YouTube fanclip coming up where the Playmate’s 12″ Kirk takes on the Mattel Barbie Kirk to see who kicks more ass: The action figure or the doll? :-) ;-) ;-)

203. OM - January 24, 2009

“There is a reason why companies charge hundreds of dollars for replicas, compared to the above which are priced for kids and for play.”

…Actually, the cost to design a film-accurate replica isn’t that much more than a not-quite-accurate toy. The myth is perpetuated to justify the extortion rates they charge for such items.

204. McCoy - January 25, 2009

On a side note, I did some reading…

In The Menagerie, the number 11 comes up an interesting number of times…

1) Spock served 11 years with Pike
2) Spock retrieves Pike from Starbase 11
3) Talos galaxy contains 11 planets
4) There were 11 survivors from the crash

205. Devon - January 25, 2009

5) This is movie number 11! ;)

206. Pete - January 25, 2009

@ 200 Epic

I too made a composition from Madman1701A’s mesh work here:

http://www.redshirtsbrigade.com/phoenix.jpg

Pete

207. Pete - January 25, 2009

@ 199 Dr. Image

I actually own the prototype of Scott’s Mark II that you linked to. A very beautiful piece. I too was hoping that the phaser in this movie was going to hold such design. Scott actually designed that phaser after seeing a concept i created of what I thought the uniforms should look like in this movie.

Pete

208. Spockish - January 25, 2009

I have an old NCC-1701A model hanging above my computer desk, it was made back in the late 80’s by a friend who now builds models for NASA and with a Space Station DS9 in a corner, It is setup to look like the Enterprise is orbiting the station. I guess I’ll be replacing the old Shatner Enterprise with the new one. Hopefully in the next movie there will be a Deep Space Station so I can update the old DS9 model. My Enterprise has fiber optic lights but changing the button cell batteries is a pain in the (some other body part besides neck or ass, those are so 20th Century).

I just wish I could have gotten the ISS model his brother had before Cancer took his life, no thanks to that Camel. It had fiber optic lights also but the battery power came from a Soyuz space ship that docked and used AAA’s. But NASA took it back and it is now in some east coast display. The model was of what the completed Station would look like with a few ESA dream ideas.

209. Richard Martin - January 25, 2009

That looks like a crappy Captain Proton/ Buck Rogers one. The brige too has too many consoles, (the inner ring). Otherwise they all look good, very much like the continutation of the Enterprise technology. Very useful for the Enterprise timeline fanfilms.

210. Paul - January 25, 2009

Tricorder that says “Tricorder”… can you say aaawwwkward? :P

211. Sydney - January 25, 2009

All these baby tantrums about the nacelles. Doesn’t anyone here have eyes? The toy photos give away a crucial distinguishing feature of ST11’s Enterprise — apart from superficial flourishes.

Wondering why the gray bands at nacelle-strut attachment points?

See the toy photo.

They’re joints.

Variable geometry.

Ryan almost screamed the same, months ago.

212. Capt. of the USS Anduril - January 25, 2009

Anthony-
Has there been a date set for the release of these items? Entertainment Earth has it listed as March, but I thought they weren’t coming out until April?

213. Al Hartman - January 25, 2009

#211 – Why do I care about variable geometry?

Relics, Trials and Tribbleations and In A Mirror Darkly were amongst the highest rated episodes of TNG, DS9, and Enterprise.

It wasn’t because the TOS designs were outdated.

The stupid decision to change things that didn’t need changing is going to sink this movie. Fans that would have gone 20x and more to see this movie on a big screen may only go once, or wait for the DVD release.

Millions of people downloaded the Star Trek New Voyages pilot: “Come What May” and eagerly await each subsequent installment.

TOS was good enough to generate one of the largest and most loyal fanbases in entertainment history, and Paramount rewards that loyalty constantly with pokes in the eye.

Why don’t we redesign baseball or football to attract a wider base of viewers?

Why don’t we reformulate the Big Mac or Coke… Oh yeah, they tried reformulating Coke and it flopped like Nemesis.

Paramount has to realize they are in the business of providing entertainment people want and demand… Not to induldge the egos of producers and directors who want to foist their lousy “new takes”‘ on a classic on us.

Phase II, Farragut and Exeter are successful because they give fans what they want… Real, original formula Trek. Not this crap that is coming our way this May.

Ron Moore got BSG right because he kept the iconic stuff recognizable. The Galactica, the Vipers, the ships in the fleet… He even used classic Cylons, Basestars and other stuff in the museum scene in the pilot. He used the classic theme as the colonial anthem. Think we’re going to hear even a bit of the Courage theme?

Based on what we’re seeing so far, I wouldn’t bet on it.

214. AJ - January 25, 2009

212:

I’m not sure “millions” downloaded “Come What May.” Last i saw “Blood and Fire” was at 200,000.

When “ST Enterprise” was canceled, during its best season, it barely had 4 million viewers per ep. Disaster. Failure. You cited “Nemesis.” Failure.

Professional sports ARE altered to increase business: Baltimore Ravens, Tennessee Titans, NL/AL interleague regular season games, football games in London. Beckham didn’t come to the US to win games, but to fill seats. It’s all about the cash.

Star Trek has been refererred to a “a billion dollar franchise” after 10 films and 700 or so filmed episodes. Today, one successful genre film makes a billion dollars gross. So Star Trek needs to evolve into what Star Wars was in ’77, or T2 was in ’89, or Iron Man/Dark Knight last year.

To agree with you, if CBS had made a decision to go direct-to-DVD, or to Sci-Fi channel with something more in line with original Treks, I would be just as pumped.

Michael Giacchino has stated that the Courage theme is in the film, BTW.

215. Sam Belil - January 25, 2009

#127 – Lord Garth —
GREAT IMAGES and yes, you’re so RIGHT!!! I have stated many times before I so want to accept this movie, so WANT TO LOVE this movie — but the more that I see and the closer we get, my enthusiasm continues to go south!!! This could very well be “Lost in Space”!!!

216. Capt. of the USS Anduril - January 25, 2009

215: Well, the Kelvin’s bridge resembles the Jupiter 2. >.>

213: Okay, you’ve made your point. The “fans” want more TOS. Well, ever think about this fact: FANS ARE OLD. Face it guys, we’re aging. I may only be 23, but I know there are fans much older. And honestly, except for indoctrinating our children into liking it(or siblings, etc), there aren’t that many new fans. Someone can’t watch an episode of TOS and take it seriously enough to watch the entire saga of Star Trek. And someone new to the franchise can’t watch, say, Nemesis, without knowing a bit about everything that came before. Going back to the beginning is what had to happen to bring more fans into the theaters. As I’ve said many times, my 15 y/o sister, who has a passing tolerance of Star Trek, is really excited to see this movie. That’s what I want to hear. If this isn’t the Trek for you, maybe you should just stop visiting the site, because your negative comments about everything do not help the Trekkie image.

217. Aragorn189 - January 25, 2009

Did any of you think that there were multiple hand Phaser Variants carried in the armory? Look at Star Trek 2 and 3. There are two variants used yet they occur right after each other. On is made by one company and the other by another.

218. Lord Garth, Formerly Of Izar - January 25, 2009

Thanks for the kind words Sammy. Actually I like the Bridge (except for those cordless screwdriver looking things with large red buttons sticking up from the middle of the consules that draw ones eye like a mustache on the Mona Lisa , seem terrible out of place and look F-ing stupid as hell and ruin an otherwise cool looking set) I like the Phaser (though I want to see the actual movie prop before I really make my mind up< I like the communicator and I like the tricorder.

My Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig problem is with the ship, the most important aspect of the production design sucks. We’ve all been through this add nauseum. Most seem to agree that we love sperate elements of the ship (love the primary hull because it looks almost exactly like the TMP) (like the new dish, kind of like the new engines except that the need to be circumcized immediatly by a qualified Bris) HATE THE SECONDARY HULL- Hate the supporting pylons but would love them if they were flipped upside down and laid at a wider angle from one another

Hate the way things look scrunched together. Connecting dorsal scrunched oddly to far back, Engines too close together, pylons look upside down, BUT to me the most egregious aspect of the design in that damn secondary hull, sorry can’t get over it. It’s fugly. It looks half eaten and does not flow well for me at all. Besides that if this ship is roughly the same length as the original, where the hell does all the cargo go???? The section of the secondary hall that houses cargo, and extra shuttles is gone. Unless this ship is much much larger than the original which may be from the initial teaser that seemed to show the decks were much taller and more spacious than the orignial E. The outer rim of the middle dish seemed to house twice as many decks as the TMP E. Don’t know. If this is a much larger ship (1000 meters as some have said) then why are there only two rows of portholes on the outer rim of the saucer?? Must be biiiiiig windows.

Anyway the point is I hate the overall design of this Enterprise. Not the interiors but the Exterior of the ship. I think many of us did better with our own spins on the Church design with only some minor tweaking and I hope it gets the other half of it’s secondary hull back in the next film.

219. Peter N - January 25, 2009

“an alternative for those who do not wish to spend hundreds of dollars on prop replicas”

Mr. Patterson, are you reading this?

I still need to get out and pick up the Countdown comic….

220. Peter - January 25, 2009

Don’t like the belt and buckles for the phasers. They should attach to the uniform as they did in TOS. The less clunk, the better.

221. Chris Pike - January 25, 2009

216. Lord Garth, Formerly Of Izar – January 25, 2009

I may have fewer words, but can’t help agreeing with a lot of that and it does seem at the very least that there’s been some lacking in thought in the design process…

222. Peter - January 25, 2009

With all that chrome on the Phaser, they could have at least left the original emitter nozzle and acrylic tip.

What I don’t see are the Phaser, communicator and the tricorder looking like a unified or uniform set, as the TOS landing part gear did. in TOS, they all had something visually in common with one another. This stuff looks like it a hodge-podge.

223. Sam Belil - January 25, 2009

Lord Garth #216 — my pleasure. But sadly — making this into an “altered timeline” story and (when you think about it, not a TRUE origin story (as were originally led to believe) — it gave Abrams and company an excuse to make (in my opinion) one radical change TOO MANY!!!! Subtle changes to the interior would have been okay. I CANNOT stand the new bridge (that might change when I see the movie) — I’m certainly MOST UNHAPPY with the new look of the Enterprise. Keep your opinions coming!!!

224. Can't Wait for May 2008 - January 25, 2009

I love how this post was about the toys and now we are back in the same old cycle of complaining about how it is not TOS. We are lucky that Star Trek is getting this much buzz from the mainstream media. I have not seen so much complaining since the new Battlestar Galactica mini series came out. My thing is just has long has the story is good and I have a good time with it, thats all I care about.

225. OneBuckFilms - January 25, 2009

222 – Since the Movie version of the phaser reportedly isn’t as shiny as the toy, there is a false assumption.

The Communicator and Tricorder to me DO look like they are from a unified design ethos.

The Phaser also looks like it belongs in that idea, though the toy makes it stand apart due to the overt chrome.

226. SPOCKBOY - January 25, 2009

#199. Dr. Image

http://www.xscapesprops.com/Valkyrie_Props.htm

Scott Nakada rocks!
That is great work!

I like the overall shape of the Abrams one but the darker gun metal look of the original and Scott’s excellent subtle changes makes it looks less like a “sci-fi ray gun”
I’ve also always loved how the original phaser 1 slips into phaser 2.
Excellent subtle changes Scott. I definitely like the more rounded less boxy look of the new ones.
I have to say though that I really like the ergonomic design of the handle on the Abrams phaser.

; )

227. McCoy - January 25, 2009

It is possible, that if this movie truly takes place before TOS, the gadgets, the bridge and the Big E will eventually be upgraded to what we expect and hope for…

1) The time cops could take the new technology away. Perhaps it’s at this juncture in time they come to be, and the all the other time cops we have seen are out and about to fix the problems that start here.

2) Nimoy’s Spock could erase some memories.

3) Perhaps the equipment, bridge and ship we see here is replacing the Pike-era designs. The Kirk-era (after WNMHGB) will receive the correct gadgets? (Of course the uniforms kill this idea since they already reflect the post WNMHGB era.)

4) Timeline is rest to normal at end of film.

228. Anthony Pascale - January 25, 2009

RE: Dates
I have been told April 19th. EE has had March on some of their items since they first went up months ago. I believe the April 19th date trumps as it is the latest info from Playmates.

229. THE GOVERNATOR - January 25, 2009

I can see that there are some fans who have a problem with the new Enterprise, mainly because of how it differs with the original and also because of how some say it “doesn’t look like it can support itself.” However, if you were to stare at the original Matt Jefferies design, you will find that even more support problems exist with it. Now, look at the original very closely and stare at it for several minutes. (not several seconds, several minutes). If you look specifically at the neck that supports the saucer, you will find yourself asking the question: How can that huge saucer be supported by that skinny little neck? Also look at the nacelles and you will see that because of the diagonal angle of the pylons that the nacelles should just break them right off.

Now look at the new design. You will find that Ryan Church and John Eaves have eliminated most of these problems. The new wider and longer neck and its location under the saucer make you believe that the saucer can be supported. Also, the way that the pylons bend under the Nacelles make it much easier for them to be supported. And the fact that most of the weight of the nacelles would be placed up on their front sides due to their large undersides puts the weight on the pylons and therefore on the engineering/secondary hull. So, although to fans of Star Trek who regularly see the original design and therefore have learned to believe in its design abilities, the new design is actually more believable and practical. It also looks like something that was designed by General Dynamics or something. The original design will always be iconic, but this new design definitely echos some realism as well as that original fantasy future aspect.

230. THE GOVERNATOR - January 25, 2009

Oh, and in the vacuum of space, the weight doesn’t matter anyway so its all just irrelevant. Just speaking on behalf of visual believability.

231. Dierna - January 25, 2009

Of all those figs…I’ll just take the Spocks. Mostly the 3.75 inch and the 6inch ones mostly. Maybe the Spock Ken doll too… Aww heck… I just know I’ll end up getting one of each of the Spock varients!

What’s up with the Vulcan like eyebrows on Chekov?

Is it just me or is Nero crosseyed???

232. McCoy - January 25, 2009

229

Disagree with your premise.

Both ships are science fiction. Irgo, both ships are not real. Since both ships are fake, go with the classic.

When making a movie about a CLASSIC, iconic TV series with a classic, iconic ship, the design should echo the original. Reverence.

233. Montgomery Scott - January 25, 2009

I like this ship! It’s exciting.

234. Fleet Captain Kor'Tar - January 25, 2009

#206 Pete –

Awesome wall papers !!! I have a request , can you take the ship in the pic and put against the black of space with stars please? With the angle you just used in the “From the Ashes of Vulcan – Rises a Pheonix”

235. William Kirk - January 25, 2009

I still don´t like the ship.

236. Sydney - January 25, 2009

Wrong, Al Hartman. Or watch this:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1fpb6_gene-roddenberry-interview_fun

“You can’t do what the audience wants — that way lies prostitution.”

–Gene Roddenberry

You may disagree with me, fine, but don’t pretend you understand the alchemy of good entertainment. You haven’t the credentials. Otherwise your pseudoanalysis would not have omitted the Enterprise D, much less 90% of BSG Reimagined. To claim the latter bears more than occasional aesthetic reference to the original is bare-faced ignorance.

You can’t recognize an essential artistic criterion, but it’s worth grounding in regardless:

“If memories were all I sang, I’d rather drive a truck.”

–Ricky Nelson

237. johnny - January 25, 2009

YES the governator makes a good point the would have to change the look of the enterprise for the movie in order to make it believe able because IT IS BEING BUILT ON EARTH

238. McCoy - January 25, 2009

236

I don’t know if this film will be unsuccessful or not but I can say with 100% confidence that it would be MORE successful using designs closer to the originals. After all, that’s continuity and expectation. Bringing in more of the older fans cannot be bad. Let the story, effects and young actors bring in the new crowd (if they are to come at all). The newbies would never have know the difference.

Also, we are not talking about wanting the same old story…we want new stories, new memories. But in order to transport us there, you have to design the world with (more) reverence to what came before. Otherwise, it just looks like another generic attempt at ST stereotypes or parody. From a design point of view, you have to come up with designs that say “this is the original”; “this is where it all started” and “we’re not afraid to say “this is Trek”. No apologies.

239. iplaicawd - January 25, 2009

i have been working on a new phaser myself

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j40/cawdplyr/type-2.jpg

240. Fleet Captain Kor'Tar - January 25, 2009

#239 iplaicawd – LOL!!!

241. Rick James - January 25, 2009

Interesting stuff. The new Enterprise resembles the old one enough, when viewed from certain angles, I can live with it. That being said I won’t be getting a new Enterprise and I’ll keep my AA 1701-A on display.

The handheld props I’m kinda indifferent too. The bridge and transporter room are different yet familiar enough I know what they are.

Regardless if the story of this movie sucks it won’t matter how good or bad the sets, ships, props and costumes look. All that stuff is window dressing for the story.

Only the power of a good story can make a paper mache cone seem scary i.e. the original version of the Doomsday Machine not the TOS-R remake.

Based upon what I’ve seen so far, I can’t tell if the new Trek movie’s story is going to be good or bad. I’ll have to reserve judgement until I can see the film for myself.

242. johnny - January 25, 2009

241 the doomsday machine was a wind sock dipped in cement

243. McCoy - January 25, 2009

Star Trek, like Star Wars and many other science fiction films, are more than their respective stories. They contain gadgets and ships that we come to love and then expect to see in future installments. We love to buy them.

As I mentioned above, TOS specifically told us that “these were the voyages of the Starship Enterprise”. Not the voyages of Kirk or Spock. So, the Enterprise is an EXTREMELY important part of that which is Trek.

What would the Star Wars fans say if in 10 years someone does a Star Wars re-make and changes the look of the Millennium Falcon? Changes Luke’s light sabre? Vader’s mask?

That’s what we are talking about here. Everyone who is open to the new look and the new toys are treating this as a new Trek adventure moving forward in the timeline (our timeline) but in reality, this movie is supposed to introduce new actors into a franchise that has already defined the look and feel of that era. Even the new Bond ended up back in his classic DB5.

244. johnny - January 25, 2009

well said McCoy

245. Capt. of the USS Anduril - January 25, 2009

The new Bond was in the DB5 for what, five minutes of Casino Royale before trading it in for the DB8?

And I’m a Star Wars fan and if someone wanted to remake it and get rid of the emo whiney Jedi who somehow becomes the bad*** known as Vader and replace him with a character who is more acceptable, I’d be all for it, thank you very much. Unfortunately, that won’t happen because Lucas is too much of a tool.

As for your notion that the gadgets shouldn’t change, you’re leaving out a good portion of Star Trek. Look at the Enterprise-D. It bears maybe a 10% resemblance to its predecessors, and it’s misshapen to boot. The phasers of TNG onward don’t resemble the ones from the TOS era. They don’t even look like weapons. And then there’s the Defiant which seems to abandon all the “rules” of starship design. The ideals of Trek design are fluid and always will be. There’s no sense trying to fight it.

246. johnny - January 25, 2009

it was a DBS, not a DB8

247. McCoy - January 25, 2009

245.

It didn’t matter as much what TNG did…they moved forward through the Trek timeline. But if you made a movie about the early days of Enterprise D, I would expect to see the same gadgets and ships from that era.

Pick an era, match those designs. It’s really simple.

Want to re-tool things? Make things look more futuristic? Move forward from the TNG timeline with a new ship. New generation. Whatever designs you see fit.

248. McCoy - January 25, 2009

You have to pick which direction you want to go.

1) go back to Kirk’s era

or

2) design new stuff

Can’t do both.

249. THE GOVERNATOR - January 25, 2009

248:

You can’t. I can.

250. THE GOVERNATOR - January 25, 2009

Abrams has said that he wants his Star Trek to feel real. So making the Enterprise feel more realistic only makes sense.

251. THE GOVERNATOR - January 25, 2009

Oh, and these designs aren’t new. They are updated. That’s all.

252. McCoy - January 25, 2009

There’s a line you cross in design where something is no longer an update and it becomes something “new”. From what we have seen, the line has been crossed on everything in this movie except the uniforms and character names. IMHO

253. Anthony Thompson - January 26, 2009

40. Stanky

Your constant (and reflexive) negativity has gone way beyond tiresome. Let me ask you: Why do you come here if you hate the project so much? Are you a glutton for punishment? Or do you simply enjoy raining on everyone else’s parade? Either way, Shatner’s famous line from SNL certainly applies to you!

254. Stanky McFibberich - January 26, 2009

re:253
I’m sorry. I didn’t realize that I was the only “negative” voice here at the love fest. You’ve made it all so clear now.

It’s called opinion, Jack. The ship design and bridge design as shown in these pictures are crap (in my opinion). Making a movie with recast (fake actors) people in those roles is wrong (in my opinion). Other than the uniforms, everything I’ve seen so far is wrong (in my opinion).

Show me something else I like about it, and I will let you know. Maybe that’s why I keep looking at it.

re:247 and 248
Well stated.

255. Stanky McFibberich - January 26, 2009

Just to be fair, when I say crap about the ship and bridge, it is not to say that for some other series or some other later era of Star Trek (if there must be such a thing) that they would not be acceptable. Not for this, though. I’m sure the designers were working with whatever misguided direction they were given.

256. I am Kurok! - January 26, 2009

I’d like to see action figures of Kirk, Sulu, and the “expendable engineer” in their ‘orbital sky-dive suits.’

257. McCoy - January 26, 2009

255

I agree. If you just tune in and see the visuals for the first time wondering what the new Trek film has going on, the gadgets and ship are not that bad. I would argue that are also really not that great, sort of generic IMO. But “OK” for a new generation of Trek stuff that doesn’t want to distract from the characters.

It’s really the context of what these things “should” look like for Kirk’s era where everything is way off track (except uniforms).

However, I still hold out a glimmer of hope things will be different at the end of the film.

258. AJ - January 26, 2009

257:

I think it’s over-optimistic to think that the new TOS film will do a big reveal of original series design of “Trek stuff.”

George Kirk’s premature death will not result in a production design step-change of the type we see in Trek11.

Purists just have to live with it.

259. Cervantes - January 26, 2009

Been away a while, and I’ve come back to find heaps of info. / photos since I last checked in….which was nice….except not all of it was good….

As a long-standing fan of the design-work that was established on ‘Star Trek TOS’, and being a designer myself, I was really looking forward to an ‘embellishing/upgrading’ of the iconic Production Design on that show, where this ‘TOS’-centric Movie was concerned.

Unfortunately, I’m one of the ones that have been underwhelmed at the amount of actual deviation from some of the look of the original designs. I must agree 100% with post # 238 by McCoy, that we are at the stage now where it is obvious that we are just getting ‘new’ Trek, as opposed to ‘TOS’ Trek, where some of these changes are concerned.

As far as I can see now, about the only thing that hasn’t been OVERLY ‘re-imagined’ for this thing has been Uhurah’s ‘ear-piece’!

I welcome the idea of this Movie, and believe it will be a success….but no matter how spectacular the effects make it look onscreen, I’ve seen enough disappointing ‘angles’ of J.J.’s new ‘Enterprise’ design now, to know that I’m NEVER gonna love the look of it….

That’s just my opinion. I’m sure the Movie will be great in other ways to me, but the ‘look’ of it was something I’d hoped to love. Ah, well….design sensibility is a very individual thing, and mine is very different to J.J.’s obviously.

By the way Dr. Image, that respectful ‘TOS’ handphaser upgrade by Scott Nakada was indeed very nicely done.

And Lord Garth….I’d just like to say that your recent design for a ‘re-imagined’ TOS ‘Enterprise’ would have looked fabulous onscreen! –
http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z138/bearsturf/IMG.jpg

260. Lord Garth, Formerly Of Izar - January 26, 2009

Thanks Cervantes welcome back to the fold. I have been working on a whole bunch of stuff I hope to share with everyone. I tend to draw on larger Bristol board so it’s hard to scan the stuff at home on my HP workcenter.

261. Okie Trekker - January 26, 2009

So I’ve never been real good with math and measurements – are the smaller sized action figures about the same size as the ever-popular Star Wars and the current line of DC Universe “Crisis” figures, or are they larger than that?

262. johnny - January 26, 2009

i guess that the saying smooth as a ken doll is now smooth as a kirk doll

263. everyday_ponn_far - January 26, 2009

here’s the big E – Toy in action
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/vf-1207/Ent_in_action-1.jpg

264. Cervantes - January 26, 2009

#260 Lord Garth

I’ll look forward to seeing it all, going by your tremendous ‘Enterprise’ concept! Is it deliberately going ‘off the page’ at either side by the way? If not, I’d like to see scans of the ‘missing’ ends of the design too, if you can manage that sometime.

Man, how I wish YOUR version was the big screen one we were getting….

I’d have DEFINATELY enjoyed seeing a toy of that! ;)

265. johnny - January 26, 2009

ya know what i don’t understand is you people grown men…hell even grown women, you bicker about toys, child’s play things, if you don;t like them don’t see it hell don;t even see the movie just don’t ruin it for every one else!

266. Cervantes - January 26, 2009

#265 johnny

As far as I know, these threads are for various views (within reason and decency!), and you are welcome to yours too. However, what I’d suggest to you in that case, is don’t read these threads if you feel that that you may somehow read something that will put you off this Movie in any way….or put you off the toys in any way, considering you been interested enough in them to read this topic this far.

By the way Lord Garth, I enquired about the possibility of a dedicated ‘Fan Art’ section for submissions, a while back….but no developments on that front yet. I remember how some of the terrific stuff that was put on the Kongisking.net site really amped up the anticipation for that at the time, in the run-up to it’s release.

267. johnny - January 26, 2009

#266 there is no way i will be put off this movie, or the toys, unless i get killed off due to the color of my shirt

268. johnny - January 26, 2009

and these toys are awsome!!!

269. doubting thomas - January 26, 2009

199

now that is a damn good phaser design. that is the kind of thing where, if it were used in a series as the phaser of the period, i could believe it was the same weapon, just with more detail visible. that would go well with the new uniforms (without the delta fabric) and the communicator design i posted. that’s what they should be doing instead of this alternate timeline crap, just enhance detail.

270. Brian Matthews - January 26, 2009

#30:
It seems to me that the circular pad on the communicator is divided up into button sections, like the circular mp3 player controls we see nowadays.

271. Brian Matthews - January 26, 2009

#135
There are folks who seem to be under the impression that warp engines are like uber-rocket motors dragging or pushing the ship along. I may not know all about theoretical Star-Trekkian physics, but it’s my understanding that warp engines don’t do anything even remotely resembling this. The nacelle pylons aren’t WINGS… they probably can’t get ‘ripped off’ in flight. The pylons are there to hold the warp engines up in the configuration they need to achieve warp.

272. JP Saylor - January 27, 2009

*sigh*

It just seems that Apple rose in popularity in the late 22nd century, and as a result, they became more powerful and more advanced that anything on Earth. So when Earth wanted to go to space, the commissioned Apple to come out with the:

TRiCorder

iPhaser

iConstitution Class starship

Get my drift?

They are cool looking, but so is my iPod. They future-ized everything according to modern standards.

273. johnny - January 27, 2009

272, thats what the did in the 60’s and 80’s

274. Closettrekker - January 27, 2009

#213—“Relics, Trials and Tribbleations and In A Mirror Darkly were amongst the highest rated episodes of TNG, DS9, and Enterprise.”

And no one but the “geeks only” club was watching that.

This film’s budget dictates that a mere pandering to established Star Trek fans will not get it done.

275. Mark - January 27, 2009

I always am entertained and depressed at the same time when I read these post. Why do I keep reading them, then? I think it is like a train wreck and I just can’t help it.

Everything isn’t just as I would have designed it, but I’m looking forward to the movie. For those of you who keep complaining about the things changed, just enjoy the Star Trek adventures in your heads with you as the star. Change things the way you want them and enjoy. No one is stopping you from doing that. For the rest of us, see you May 8th at the theaters.

276. McCoy - January 27, 2009

274— “This film’s budget dictates that a mere pandering to established Star Trek fans will not get it done.”

Well I’m not sure the larger budget meant the designs had to deviate this far, but if that is the reason, then they should not have gone that direction. Come up with some other franchise or even a brand new sci-fi team and have even more creative freedom. If a smaller budget would have yielded a great story with more familiar designs, I’d be for that.

277. Trekcast Episode 11: My Andorian can beat up your ewok | Trekcast - January 27, 2009

[...] Star Trek news including IDW comics prequel to the new Star Trek feature film Star trek Countdown. Playmates toys releases a whole tribble load of images for there upcoming Star Trek XI toy line. Last but [...]

278. Shatner_Fan_Prime - January 27, 2009

“If a smaller budget would have yielded a great story with more familiar designs, I’d be for that.”

Closettrekker’s point was that Paramount isn’t interested in dealing with small numbers. They’re spending big $ to hopefully make even bigger $.

I find my own view somewhere between the two of yours. I can see where exactly reproducing the look of the 60’s would’ve been awkward for the design team, who understandably wouldn’t want the production to seem retro. But I also don’t think they needed to deviate quite as much as they did. The Enterprise, especially. If one thing was left “as is,” it should’ve been the ship exterior. But at least the costumes look great. If they had changed those, it just wouldn’t feel like Trek to me. They could have very easily gone for the standard, awful black leather look you see in every action movie, and I would have puked up a tribble.

279. Planet Pandro - January 27, 2009

#274-

Those certainly are wonderful episodes. But I would go so far as to say that whenever any ‘modern trek’ (TNG-ENT) went back into the TOS time period, the retro designs were faithful to a fault out of (ugh, here it comes…) nostalgia. Relics gave us a holo-recreation of the TOS bridge as tribute to the occasion that a TOS star was on hand. And it was a touching moment. But I also remember reading somewhere that they had the Trek 6 bridge in storage that they also were considering dusting off and using it, but it was actually easier to build the partial TOS set. DS9’s “Trials…” was a 30th anniversary commemoration ep. if I remember (there’s your nostalgia), and everything needed to be built exactly b/c of “Forrest Gumping” DS9 cast members into specific scenes. “Mirror Darkly” was great fun, but could also be perceived as a ploy to lure more TOS fans into watching, even if for a couple episodes, drawing on largely the nostalgia of seeing those designs.
And so where that is all well and good (again, some fav. episodes of mine), the new movie seems not to pull from nostalgia, and in fact to avoid nostalgia by presenting us with a new design sensibility that remains familiar yet new. One big goal here is to make Trek relevant again, and I don’t think that can be accomplished today without updating the look of our favorite starship and all the sets and gadgets therein. Please don’t get me wrong, I love the old show. However I also get the feeling I’ll love this new movie too, regardless of the visual tinkering.

280. Blowback - January 27, 2009

278. Shatner_Fan_Prime

I am in your camp. I was anticipating changes but it feels like they took it a little too far. Nothing that will ruin my enjoyment if this is a good movie…

281. johnny - January 27, 2009

i grew up on the 60’s star trek, at first i despised the changes at first then grew to love them…except the phaser, don’t under stand the barrel thingy. but they look cool and odds are i will be buying these

282. Aragorn189 - January 27, 2009

281,

The Toy has the rotating barrels. We will have to see if the actual prop in the film will use the rotation of barrels to change settings or if there is an outside switch.

283. johnny - January 27, 2009

i hope to god there is a out side switch, or i hope these are not the finished products, i think the only thing i do not like in this whole thing is the rotating barrel on the phaser,but none the less i will buy all of these

284. A sad Trek fan - January 28, 2009

The ship looks stupid.. the design is very poor.

The toy range will appeal to the children but to the discerning collector it will be overlooked.

As with Enterprise.. the film is to pre date real Star Trek and once again they have made it look way to modern for the time period.

285. Anthony Thompson - January 28, 2009

284.

How can they make it ” way too modern” for events and technology that exist 3 centuries distant from our time? In fact, they can’t possibly make it “modern” enough!

286. johnny - January 28, 2009

284 once again this is not the 60s

287. McCoy - January 29, 2009

To each his own of course, and I don’t mean to offend, but the design of these items (aside from the uniforms) don’t say “Trek”. The only thing about them that says “Trek” is the mere fact they are calling that on the packaging.

I don’t understand the knee-jerk willingness to automatically buy something simply because the manufacturer says it’s Trek. These designs are far too generic. You could literally take any water gun from Wal-Mart, paint it silver and call it a Trek gun…and you guys would buy it. Or any plastic toy cell phone and poof, communicator. Seriously.

288. johnny - January 29, 2009

so you find a water gun and spray paint it chrome, and i won’t buy the toys

p.s. i must see pictures

289. Quills - January 30, 2009

Don’t know if anyone posted these, so I’ll do it. The first has the movie Enterprise, which I really hate. The Enterprise has no “@$$”. The second is a mod that I actually do like. No, I didn’t do it, I just like it. The tricorder and communicator are cool, but the phaser is aweful. The bridge toy looks better than the footage I’ve seen of the actual bridge, which is bright and white. Makes ya feel like you’re at an optometrists.

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/st09ent2_compare.jpg

http://aqua.mysfdb.com/wp-content/gallery/fan-art/fifth_ugly_kitbash.jpg

290. Joe the Jock - February 22, 2009

With Indiana Jones Crystal Skull sucking weiners, we got the phrase “Nuking the Fridge”. If this movie sucks, we’ll get “Beaming the Dog”.
I like all the fat boy comic book store owner comments. Just remember- if it wasn’t for the second Death Star, there would be no Ewoks.
Nerds! I’ll pound all of you, and break your computers.

291. david - March 19, 2009

Thank the “Great Bird of the Galaxy” that I am not the only one who doesn’t like this “Reinvented” Star Trek. The reason Spock looks so sad is because they took the best of Trek and turned it inside out and shoved it back together backwards!

As for the uniforms and toys I could care less…. But to take apart the “lady” of the old show and put her back together looking like a redesigned “Edsel” makes tears come to me eyes. I was so looking forward to seeing the ENTERPRISE on the big screen, revolving nacelle intakes and all, with lots of close up detail shots of the hull as she made passes in “beauty” shots of her leaving on a mission (remember STTMP?) She was the real star of the old show and deserves better than what has happened to her,a model builder’s kitbash nightmare!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I hope that someone in the production department of Star Trek, whomever is running it these days takes notice…. The monstrosity you have hatched really stinks….When you can’t even get the main star of the show right that tells me that you had the almighty dollar in your eyes and not the fans of the old show who were expecting better….

Fire Abrams……fire Berman…….find a real fan to run Star Trek , someone who will respect the original and not try to make all of it look like the Next Generation that went on a time travel redesign bender and woke up naked the next morning with Chewbacca (sorry chewy!)

292. James Random - April 9, 2009

To be honest these toys are pure crap, compared to how Playmates and Art Asylum used to do the TNG/DS9 and the TOS gadgets and ships. The phaser looks like one of those nasty futuristic guns you’d find in a dime store that rattles and vibrates and lights up and is always found at the bottom of a cellar. The figures and playsets look contrived and little more than white plastic with a fews stickers thrown on. The ship isn’t as detailed as the previous playmates ships to have come out and generally the whole range looks like cheap japanese crap (which is exactly what it is). Perhaps the japanese should stick to making swirly poop toys and leave star trek alone.

293. James Random - April 9, 2009

&284: The ship is closer to what Rodenberry first envisioned than the original Enterprise does, in fact. Part of the reason the original enterprise ended up the way it did was due to 1) A super-low budget, since Paramount couldn’t see Star Trek ever taking off as being popular they had next to no money (indeed, the transporter effect was made by running shredded pom pom’s down a mirror) and the technological limitations of the NINETEEN SIXTIES! Seriously, how can you expect anyone to try and make a film in the 23rd century and still make the sets look like a 60’s jazz lounge? If Rodenberry were alive today, Star Trek would end up the same way because all of the stuff he wanted to do, but couldn’t is in this film.

294. Lord Mudd - April 12, 2009

Playmates screwed up when they changed the scale of the figures to begin with. Even so, I came up with a workable idea for a holodeck playset that would be cost effective, unlike the bridge playset they did, but because of the rude way Toybiz screwed me when I made a suggestion to them, I insisted on a recordable medium for communicating my idea. They never called me, so all of you collectors out there missed out on a really cool idea/playset. Now they are using the exact concept for the new bridge playset. For a toy line based on a futuristic theme, they are at least 20 years behind me.

295. Stephen G. - May 4, 2009

Stillm looking for the D7 Klingion ship that they
missed the first time away

Glad you got the rights back we missed you playmates

thanks
shg1701

296. 1701-A - June 18, 2009

The best angle of the JJ-PRISE was after the credits rolled… The Kalvin on the other hand looked more fathful.

297. Martin Thibault - August 1, 2009

Can you tell me when these new items will be for sale in Canada as I am very interested in them!

I already have all the items sold here to date, and I am interested in completeing the various playsets such as the bridge and transporter with the missing items that were not sold here.

298. dave - March 20, 2010

Back in the 70’s there was a set of walkie talkies that came out based on TOS star trek. They were blue over sized when compared to the ones in the series. It had the flip open face a retractable antennae and a 1/4 mile range. With today’s advances in electronics it would be nice if someone would revisit that design or idea and release something that can actually be used. When I see the communicator with its pre recorded sentences I can’t help but think that they could have done a hell of a lot better.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.