ST09 Tidbits (T+4) Spock Prime Image + Bill/JJ Hug + Church’s Enterprise Art + Post-movie Analysis + more May 11, 2009
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Great Links, Merchandise, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
For today’s post movie tidbits we finally got an nice publicity shot of Leonard Nimoy as Spock Prime. We also have a nice piece of Enterprise art from Ryan Church, video of Shatner and Abrams having a moment, lots of post-movie analysis, Spock’s ship as UFO and more.
New Image: Spock Prime
Although they have released dozens images and a whole bunch of trailers and commercials, if you didn’t keep up with the news, you would have no idea that Leonard Nimoy was in this new Star Trek movie. Today Paramount finally released the first official publicity image of Leonard Nimoy’s Spock Prime
(Click to enlarge)
Ryan Church’s Enterprise art
Speaking of new images, Ryan Church, designer of the new USS Enterprise, has updated his site with a very nice drawing of the new USS Enterprise.
(Click to enlarge)
Bill and JJ hug
The fine folks at ShatnerVision have put up more video from the day the Star Trek team came to visit Bill at his charity horse show. This new video shows a nice moment between JJ and Bill.
Meeting of the Kirk’s (via Frank Caliendo)
The last ShatnerVision video showed us the real meeting of William Shatner and Chris Pine, but on his FrankTV show, Frank Caliendo brings us his version of how that meeting went:
Star Trek Post Game Analysis
Star Trek movie was the big game over the weekend and now the Monday Morning analysis has started, with lots of examples across the web [all articles contain spoilers].
- Pop Culture Zoo tries to put together all the time-twisting
- CinemaBlend looks forward with suggestion to the sequel
- Coming Attractions has suggestions for casting in the sequel
- Den of Geek explains away the ‘Top 10 gripes’
- Finally The Washington Post weighs in on all of this kind of thing with an essay titled "The Trouble With Quibbles"
More ST09 Bullets: Trek Tech & Jellyfish spotting
- The Sunday Mercury headline reports "’Jellyfish’ style UFO’s spotted in Lichfield, Staffordshire".
- PC World looks at Star Trek Tech We Use Today (Almost)
Finally, Guillermo the Vulcan
From Jimmy Kimmel Live
Thanks to Ulrich, Phil and Devon
Loading ...
Comments»
Nice art of the Big E… now I want a large scale model kit to buy.
er, something along the lines as the same size as Polar Lights’ refit Enterprise (something like 32″+ in size). I think it is 1/350 scale.
me too.
I’d be happy with a 1/1000 like the small Polar Lights Enterprise…
i think this movie is going to make $65-68mill next week :)
KEEP BRINGING US NEWS! AND TID BITS! I LOVE IT!!! :)
ID LIKE TO SEE THAT ENTERPRISE IN THE new TOS BLU RAY
I didn’t realize from the movie how aged they made Spock look. Leonard is no where near that old looking in real life and doesn’t have nearly as much gray in his hair. He doesn’t move like an old man and his voice is a lot less gravelly. Still, he looked beautiful in the film and I was so happy to see him back on the big screen.
1/1000 is too small
Are they gonna release the excelsior or Enterprise b model or toy ship
Enterprise B and Excelsior was released as a kit a long time ago!
If the original timeline is the “Prime” Universe, can we call the new timeline the “Alpha” Universe? Calling it “the alternate reality” is both unwieldy and neglects the fact that we’ve already had other alternate realities.
Go to http://www.culttvmanshop.com/shop/index.html to look for all sorts of Star Trek, SF figures, other science fiction-related model kits, books and other odds and ends. It is a great site!
A 1/1000 scale Enterprise would be like… 90cm long.
It’s amusing to me that Spock had the discipline to keep his bangs so neatly trimmed while in exile.
Keep in mind that this Enterprise is said to be 3000 ft (900 m) long, bigger than the 1701E! You may need to “scale back” your expectations and desires.
14. Speaking of hair, I want whatever product Karl Urban and Zach Quinto used on their hair. It got wind blown a couple of times but bounced right back into place perfectly!
Where did I see that other portrait of Spock in the dark robes he was wearing when he spoke to his younger self? Great portrait, but it was obvious that it was taken when he had fallen and hurt his nose. You could see a bit of a wound on the bridge of his nose, plus a scrape on his finger. A great, dignified –albeit wounded–Spock.
I finally made it to the movie today, with out giving no real comments on the subject matter of the move. Some real interesting aspects to the story line. The authors had good ideas but they are not real true die hard fans. Some of their plot points contradict TOS and TNG views. I know it is an alternate time line due to aspects in time.
The biggest change was not the story line it was that the star ship sets no longer had the hospital like antiseptic view of technology just works why see what makes it work. It’s almost like in Biology class when you were forced to dissect a frog. You knew that a frog worked at living but many can get freaked out by visually learning how it works. But if you are into science you really want to know.
JJ shows you the parts of the frog but without the grossness of the blood. And yes if you look at a broad aspect of the parts and machinery, and knowing the fact that it was filmed at an old Budweiser plant you can see the polish they pasted over the beer making parts to become star ship parts.
I’ve never really been in a beer factory, but back when Nixon was our president I took a tour of Coors in Golden, this was before they were afraid of lawsuits and let you even get within inches of the beer they made and you could run your fingers through the Yeast and Barley that was used.
So in 2011 are we going to see a story on how they fix the little errors that were in the First version. Or are they going to stay in the new time line. Both paths present many a good story to arrive from authors minds.
And now that the Mass Media has reported that Star Trek did good, are the going to try to destroy it and promote loser this weekend, that comic guy that grade school minds love. May I guess that if you create entertainment that Intelligent minds enjoy it is to be destroyed because those free minds are not Media puppets and desire True honest freedom, not you’ll be free because we steal from those that have so those that do not have can feel as happy as those that use to have. And those that get the free gifts only have to want forget the work aspect to get every thing that those that work are able to fill their dreams and desires with.
Either way you view things go see the movie if for anything just to keep Gene Roddenberry’s Spirt alive and thriving. Then one day his dreams may become reality, if not in the same form but at least in it’s sprint.
I have the Polar Lights 1/1000 Classic Enterprise- it’s about 10 inches long. Good medium scale to play around with. Really looking forward to the Hot Wheels version too- the first three HW ships are well done.
Old Spock aside tell me how to tell my Dad why we should an old Trekker see this movie with me? 13 year old boy.
help!
True Trek
To Post 15 Robert St. John:
“Keep in mind that this Enterprise is said to be 3000 ft (900 m) long, bigger than the 1701E! You may need to “scale back” your expectations and desires.”
Your calculation are way off. It is clear even on screen that the ship is closer to the original length of 305 Meters . This can clearly be scene in the Enterprise Shuttle Bay sequences. Check your facts!
#20. Not so. We’ve been batting evidence back and forth on the official forums for a good 40 pages, and most of the evidence points to a 900m length.
Nice rendidtion of the Enterprise with the color scheme of the TOS version.
Though it reminds me a LOT of the Gabriel Köerner version!
-cs™
#19 Just tell your dad that this movie would be a good bonding experience and that you really want to see the film with him even if he doesn’t like the Idea of a new cast! I am sure he will want to go….if I was a father and my son asked me to go to some movie with him to experience it and talk about it with him I would go weather or not I like it!
#19 ask him to go, say you think it will be a good bonding Experience and that you really want to get his take on the film! I hope he goes with you…it would be one cool Father,son Experience!
Surprisingly enough, this Enterprise looks -way- better than the one in the movie. I wonder why.
#21
“Not so. We’ve been batting evidence back and forth on the official forums for a good 40 pages, and most of the evidence points to a 900m length.”
Do you know how massive the exterior saucer windows would be for the ship to be 900 meters long? You can even look at the toy and figure out it is not 900 meters long. When the camera pans out of the Enterprise Bridge you can see the bridge dome is pretty much the same as the TOS bridge dome. For the ship to be 900 meters long the Bridge dome would be 4 to 5 decks high…not so according to what we saw on screen.
Go to starshipmodeler.com….the best site for Trek model info. One of the members is currently working on the official model kit. It will be in 1/1000 scale and is equal in size to the 1/1000 scale TOS Enterprise.
All the proof is in this thread.
P.S. This guy also designed the 1/350 scale model kit of the refit Enterprise from Polar Lights.
http://www.starshipmodeler.net/talk/viewtopic.php?t=72205
Check out the first post and click on the link…
#26, #27: yep, I’m well aware. As I said, 40 page thread. We’ve gone through a *lot* of information, including an analysis of the windows. And it’s still 900m long.
Quite besides which, ILM have come back to us and told us straight out that the ship is 3000 feet long.
#28
It’s fine…when the kit comes out then you will know for sure. For modelers like myself it is clearly around 300 meters.
The only reason that 3,000 meters is being floated around is because of Wikipedia. I could change it and put 5,000 meters. If 300 meters was the first number thrown out you would say it was 300 meters =)
Besides we already know its around 300 meters because of the model kit being produced….in 1/1000 scale…sheesh.
#30 The 3000 feet quote on Wikipedia is straight from ILM. :p Between the guys who built the Enterprise and model-makers, I’m gonna go with ILM.
LOL…someone beat me to it!
Looks like someone already corrected the size on Wikipedia.
Prove to me that the 3000 was from ILM…just some goof ball making up a number.
You’ve just passed Bow and Curtsy 101, JJ. How about lower intermediate? :D
#34 sure thing. The article is here: http://www.postmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=63930E9D02644EC9A127AF67602DA756&nm=E-Newsletters&type=Publishing&mod=Publications::Article&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=C0928902C93D4F8682FB2117F7DD841F . Hope that didn’t break the table.
The relevant quote is: ‘Another aspect was the daunting scale of the ships. The Enterprise is 3,000 feet long but bad guy Eric Bana’s ship is designed to appear a humongous five miles long.’
lol…dude…nice fake there..
That is not a quote from ILM…it is commentary from the author of the article…lol.
Get me a direct quote from someone at ILM…oh wait…you can’t.
Honestly my Trek friends, I’m not to keen on the web sights some of you listed as to where to get models and decals. Not that they aren’t good, its that I know of one that I believe is best. I’ve been shopping there myself for quite sometime: http://www.federationmodels.com/ and they have it all. And what little they don’t have, they actually provide you a link to this CulTVman web sight and Starship modeler web sight. So, with this sight that I’ve listed, you will get the best of both worlds.
#37 Oh, wow. You’re grasping at such thin straws there. You don’t seriously think the author of the article made that figure up, when it matches visual evidence, and he had the people who made the ship in front of him? Give me a break.
Spockish, you’re more than entitled to post your opinion on this site, but Anthony has provided an area for reviews.
Also, I think that Mr. Orci would be happy to address your “they are not real true die hard fans” comment. And yes, I think all indications are pointing to a continuation of the timeline that you saw in the current film; a film that happens to to appeal to “Intelligent minds”, like my own.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
17. Spockish – May 11, 2009
I finally made it to the movie today, with out giving no real comments on the subject matter of the move. Some real interesting aspects to the story line. The authors had good ideas but they are not real true die hard fans. Some of their plot points contradict TOS and TNG views. I know it is an alternate time line due to aspects in time.
The biggest change was not the story line it was that the star ship sets no longer had the hospital like antiseptic view of technology just works why see what makes it work. It’s almost like in Biology class when you were forced to dissect a frog. You knew that a frog worked at living but many can get freaked out by visually learning how it works. But if you are into science you really want to know.
JJ shows you the parts of the frog but without the grossness of the blood. And yes if you look at a broad aspect of the parts and machinery, and knowing the fact that it was filmed at an old Budweiser plant you can see the polish they pasted over the beer making parts to become star ship parts.
I’ve never really been in a beer factory, but back when Nixon was our president I took a tour of Coors in Golden, this was before they were afraid of lawsuits and let you even get within inches of the beer they made and you could run your fingers through the Yeast and Barley that was used.
So in 2011 are we going to see a story on how they fix the little errors that were in the First version. Or are they going to stay in the new time line. Both paths present many a good story to arrive from authors minds.
And now that the Mass Media has reported that Star Trek did good, are the going to try to destroy it and promote loser this weekend, that comic guy that grade school minds love. May I guess that if you create entertainment that Intelligent minds enjoy it is to be destroyed because those free minds are not Media puppets and desire True honest freedom, not you’ll be free because we steal from those that have so those that do not have can feel as happy as those that use to have. And those that get the free gifts only have to want forget the work aspect to get every thing that those that work are able to fill their dreams and desires with.
Either way you view things go see the movie if for anything just to keep Gene Roddenberry’s Spirt alive and thriving. Then one day his dreams may become reality, if not in the same form but at least in it’s sprint.
#19… I think it’s great that you want to check out this movie with your dad. I have an idea that may help. If you go to an early showing on Saturday, say like the 12:00 or 1:00 show, you can pay discount pricing. As you know, movie tickets run pretty high in some places… that can be a big pill to swallow for some people, especially those that are watching their money. So, if you go to the movie before the 6:00 showing, you’ll pay as much as half that amount. Myself, I only had to pay $5 to get in. The movie is roughly two hours. But it’s got it all: action, humor, seriousness and to boot it has drama. And as this is pretty much an introduction to Star Trek, you get to be introduced to all the original characters for the first time. It’s a really enjoyable show and I’m positive he will like it. And believe me, neither of you will regret seeing this movie.
#39
The thing is, is that it does not match the visual evidence.
And I have no doubt that the 3000 in the article is a mistake. Along with numerous amount of grammatical errors in the article, it is nor far fetched that the number is incorrect
ILM will clear this up in a few days anyway. Untill a direct quote from ILM is released no one knows for sure.
#42 I assure you, it does match the visual evidence. I assembled some of it myself. And a direct quote has been released; during the course of our analysis, we shot ILM an email asking about it. They confirmed that it’s 3000ft long.
With that said, I will say that I can’t guarantee that the ship is 900m long. What I can guarantee is that the ship is not less than 700m long. That’s the absolute upper limit of my error.
The Holo site states that the Enterprise ist neither 900m long nor 305m… they say its 2500ft – 750-770m long… just a bit ahead the Sovereign… and I stick with this official experience the Enterprise site!
I’m also absolutely certain the scale of the new ship is supposed to be much as the original or 1701A, there’s a big mistake there somewhere at 3000″!
To me the saucer outer rim is slightly thicker but still 2 decks for sure.
Look at where Kirk looks up at the ship uder construction, there are some small cg human figures working on the ship that indicate the true scale, one figure walking. Clearly around the 1000″ scale, no doubt.
Ah and Those 762m are much more probable when looking at the ships outer hull, the windows, the shuttle bay… everythings seems to fit!^^
#46 I invite you to watch the final upwards pan from the first teaser trailer. A welder can be seen working on the forward edge of the saucer. His size indicates that the saucer has three or four decks in its outer rim.
#43
Feel free to post the email.
I agree with Pike…the ship is about 1,000 feet long.
For those that think it is bigger you need to bring a stable number to the table…3,000 feet or 2,500 feet.
I also agree that it does not match the visual evidence.
#19. True Trek.
You make it sound like he doesn’t want to see it because he’s a fan of the old and doesn’t want to see it messed with — assuming that’s the case, first of all. I went with my dad today, I’m 19 though, and he loved it! He thought the filmmakers and new actors nailed the characters and thought it was as good as Star Trek has been in about 15 years. He loved seeing the OLD Star Trek back. You might tell him that.
More than anything though, like everyone else said — let him know that you’re excited for it. You’ve heard good things about it and that it would mean a ton if he went to see it with you. Most likely you have other people you can see it with — but you want to go with HIM. And let him know if it sucks you’ll never ask to spend time with him again. That should cake on the guilt pretty thick, and if you’re dad is anything like mine — that should work.
@49 I don’t know where they draw the 3000… I just say what the http://www.experience-the-enterprise.com/ww/ page is saying… and they say it’s 2500ft/762m and since it an official site… they should be right ;)
#49 As you wish.
—–Original Message—–
From: [censored] [blahblahblah]
Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 11:10 AM
To: blahblahblah
Subject: Question about COVER STORY: ‘STAR TREK’ RETURNS
Good day Mr. McGorry,
I was hoping you could shed some light on a very specific part of the
article in question. I realize you’re probably very busy, but I was
hoping you could take a moment out of your day to address my questions.
Another aspect was the daunting scale of the ships. The Enterprise is
3,000 feet long…
That would be the referenced part. Where exactly did the 3000 feet
figure come from? Was it from a specific ILM employee, is it a rough
estimate or pretty exact fact? Any light you could shed on this would be
most helpful as the majority of the trekkie bandwagon is trying to
convince itself that the new Enterprise is the same size as the TOS
Enterprise (which was 289 meters, or roughly 900 feet). I’m pretty sure
though that’s not the case. The new ENT looked liked a behemoth in the
movie (which was excellent). I’m more inclined to believe the 3000
figure and I’m just looking for some confirmation. Thank you for your time.
————————-
Hi,
That’s ILM’s scale.
————————–
Two decks around the edge of the saucer…just look at the windows.
Also you have to take into account Jeffries tubes. There is space between decks. Look at this video….hmm…it sure looks like 4 decks but it’s only two deck buddy. Same scale as the old one…sorry. Go build a model and get to know these ships better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq0wVRuUFLk&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.google.com%2Fvideosearch%3Fhl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial%26hs%3D&feature=player_embedded
So ILM never responded to your email then. LOL.
Not every deck has to have windows…
#53 That video seems to suggest that the new Enterprise’s shuttlebay is about 8 metres tall.
http://img365.imageshack.us/img365/4032/st09.jpg
It’s more than 8 metres tall.
#54 You missed the ‘hi, that’s ILM’s scale part’? I’m not making this stuff up.
I gotta chime in…
Going by what I saw on screen the new ship is larger but not by that much.
The company that built the large model that was on display at the arclight in Hollywood built it at 1/350 scale and it was about 34 inches long.
That would put the ship at the 1,000 ft mark.
The website had to be mistaken. This is not the first time either an official number has been mistaken..
In Star Trek 5 we saw about 100 decks on the 1701-A when it only had 24.
The Enterprise D model from Ertl said it was 1/650 when it is really 1/1400.
The decks on the Enterprise E changed from movie to movie.
And that shuttle bay is about the size of the refit shuttle bay.
Also forgot the add that the display model was built using the CG plans from the movie.
Here is the TMP shuttlebay. Within can be seen a small one-man work pod.
http://www.oneioddities.com/renderosity/maya/enterprise/fantail_shuttle_bay1.jpg
Here is the XI shuttlebay. Within can be seen a large 10+ man personnel carrier.
http://img365.imageshack.us/img365/4032/st09.jpg
If the TMP and XI shuttlebays are the same size, then the personnel carrier is the same size as a work bee.
It’s this model right? It is indeed 1/350 scale if its 34 inches long.
http://www.bigscreen.com/journal.php?id=1435
I know the guy that works at the FX company…they built this model using the ILM plans. I’ll ask him what scale the 34 inch ship is.
#62 He has the plans themselves? Nice… ask him what length they specify.
I’ll post up the email exchange tomorrow.
Did anybody else spot James Cawley in the new movie? We all knew that he had a cameo in the new film as a Bridge Crewmember, but nobody seems to have spotted him or mentioned him…
I saw him the first time I saw the movie; there are two times when you can see him. The first is after Chekov figures that they can use one of Saturn’s moons to be invisible to Nero’s ships, and he walks over to where the rest of the main crew are assembled – he walks right past Cawley, who also walks past Chekov on the left side of the screen. In the same sequence, when Spock enters the Bridge from the Turbolift, you can see Cawley holding an electronic clipboard and looking at Spock, again on the left side of the screen. He’s not easy to miss…I saw him right away the first time!!
Congrats to James Cawley…as a fellow TOS Purist it must have been painful to stand on that horrible Bridge.
Found this…this guy did some nice math…
http://www.starshipmodeler.net/talk/viewtopic.php?t=72969
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/schematics/stxi_ships.htm
I did a quick crude scale check using the human figures as an indication
http://www.imagemachine.u-net.com/new%20E%20scale.jpg
The O circles human figures, guessing from that the small red rectangle is 6ft – from that the green rectangle is what 400ft would be across. No way is it 2000-3000ft in length.
Can someone please just ask boborci how big the new E is and put an end to it? It’s even going off over on the discussion page of the Wikipedia article on the subject. I just don’t buy 3000 ft.
I prefer Ryan Church’s sketch to the final film version… probably because of the gold nav. deflector and the missing light strips on the nacelles. The whole thing (Church’s sketch) just looks a little more old school. But regardless, the ship was gorgeous in the movie. I’m surprised to say I think I prefer it to the movie Enterprise.
Well, actually we already had a promo image of Spock Prime’s back. ;)
Anway, Paramount seems to catch up with official pics of him:
http://zach-quinto.net/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=240
http://zach-quinto.net/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=11
http://zach-quinto.net/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=12
(Scroll down for some Leonard goodness.)
I’m definitely of the opinion that this ship is nearer the size of the original, it just doesn’t make sense to have it any other way and I believe that it looks that size from the images I’ve seen (haven’t seen the movie yet, no free time, got school work to do for exams). The production team have all the information and specs at their disposal so there seems no reason to ignore it.
Can you imagine the scene?
JJ Abrams: “I want this Enterpise to be massively bigger than any ever seen in Star Trek before even though it would be totally in violation of canon and common sense and cause huge arguments on Trekmovie.com”
I’m willing to bet this never happened.
P.S. Don’t you think Trekmovie.com should get a proper forum instead of this list thing, you know, with proper reply buttons e.t.c.
Is it a funding issue?
19 hi i’m a dad, realised i had a few hours free this sunday, so thought i’d go see star trek. until the the other day my daughter asked me if i liked that programme that had “the best of both worlds” on. i said yes and she told me that there was a film on at the cinema about it, can i take her. yay, i thought she must have remembered my fave tng eps that i watch all the time, and saw the trailers for the new movie and made the connection. cool i can go to the cinema with no sense of guilt and tell the missus i’m doing it for our dear cherished daughter. my world came crashing down when she later came and gave me hug and thanked me for going to see the film with her and said the films name. you can tell your dad at least its not goddamn hannah montana your wanting him go to see.
My god. The trekkies are out in full force. “it’s 1000 feet, it’s 3000 ft, it’s this scale, it’s that scale”
Jeez is it really that important to you? It’s not real. It’s a movie for Gods sake.
You guys really have to debate, and dwell on this?
Alright I’ll accept that – I have no choice.
I have loved Trek for over 40 years, and still haven’t figured out this obsession with minutia over “fictional facts”
Please enlighten me.
Jeez…. you guys will argue over ANYTHING… first it’s how good or bad the film is, how awful the games may or may not be… now it’s the size of the ship… do you ever just sit back… and…… ENJOY trek… rather than make it so much hard work!
Bill JJ hug..priceless. This will be fixed next movie.
Bob Orci if you are looking in thanks for sharing the proposed Shatner scene. I think it would have worked. Definitely push JJ to get it in the sequel if Shatner is in. He will be more involved if he is in and that will still work between the two spocks. Believe me it will touch all us fans. Again it works, it works, it works. Or how about a last taped message (like in tholian web) to Spock and Bones, that would be great. Add your scene to new scenes based on the story between the two and their young counterparts. Awesome. Then closing with shatner space.. final frontier voiceover. Bob it would be glorious
75… Couldn’t agree more.. the scene works.. and now the timeline is changed, there are umpteen ways of getting “Kirk Prime” in there….
65. The TOS Purist aka The Purolator – May 12, 2009
You are telling me that it was “Painful” for James Cawley to stand on the bridge of an OFFICIAL paramount production of STAR TREK in that uniform ?? Wow that is quite a stretch. I bet if you talked to Cawley, he would have a completely different view point. He was in a STAR TREK MOVIE in the THEATERS.
77 – LOL…. I was just thinking the same thing!..
The WashPost got it right…
If you love something, they will remake it.
But if you really love it, you will set it free, and let them.
#7, I guess Mr. Spock is something like 200 years old in this movie so they had to make him look older.
I really like the artwork of the new Enterprise, and even thou I can live with the new version, it would have been better if they would have made it look like the image above.
And for you guys arguing about how large the Enterprise is, you have to take into account the giant warp nacelles. How many decks thick the sauser is doesn’t matter when you are talking about how long the ship is and the nacelles are probably over 1,500 feet by themselves ;)
I finally put my finger on what is so different about the image above: The nacelles have a smaller diameter than the ones in the movie and are smaller.
It’s more in porportion with the original TOS Enterprise.
I had a wonderful experience while on the set. All the people who I met were just incredibly friendly and welcoming. I will forever treasure the experience.
James Cawley
81… erm so how wide is that diameter, and how does that compare to the diameter of the ones in the film, and the diameter of the nacelles in TOS, and then… what scale is that on, and how many decks deep would that be…… Ahem…. no poke of fun at you there… but thought I’d get in with all the questions before certain folks jump up and down and demand to know this stuff! LOL
The Franz Joseph blueprints, which were fanon when released in the early 1970s, put the ship at about 1000 feet.
They’re mostly accepted now as canon, having coined the “Constitution” class moniker for that type of ship.
How did Scotty transport Archer’s Beagle? Wouldn’t the beagle have been 90 years old, or could this have been his 7th or 8th beagle? Also, was Archer still alive in his 130s?
Finally, it will be interesting to see how this effects the timeline. Assuming Wrath of Kahn still happens, and Spock dies, with Vulcan destroyed, what happens when Kirk and Crew recover Spock? Where do they return? With only 10,000 Vulcans left, will there be an elder that can return Spocks marbles from McCoy back to Spock? Or will the timeline somehow get reparied and Vulcan never gets destroyed. There are so many ways they can go with this now it will be interesting to see where everything goes in this new timeline. Also, with Spock Prime in the new timeline, perhaps another way to save Enterprise B will occur, thereby avoiding the death of Kirk? Or perhaps they never go visit the Nexus, and Guinan and the madman get into the Nexus, thereby altering the history of the Next Generation. Perhaps Enterprise D never gets destroyed.
So many ramifications!!! Interesting things to ponder.
I like this version of Church’s Enterprise more than the version of the movie. The saucer looks more like TOS and the overall proportions are far better.
85:
If Spock Prime is smart, he will buy a set of Post-It notes, and he will post them in Kirk and young Spock’s mirrors:
1. Steer clear of any DY-100 sleeper ships from the 1990’s
2. Avoid ‘Enterprise B’
3. Avoid anything called a ‘Great Barrier.”
4. When entering areas contaminated by radiation, wear a radiation-proof suit
5. No beaming in an ion storm
etc.
87. That is so funny. I could see Spock Prime giving advice to Jim Kirk… even more than to his younger self. He was so happy to see Jim…
6. Marry Carol Marcus.
#7… Also did anyone else notice how the hologram of Spock Prime shown on the Narada didn’t have him looking as aged? It was pretty much Nimoy with the shorter dark hair with ears. I wonder why?
Trekmovie says: “if you didn’t keep up with the news, you would have no idea that Leonard Nimoy was in this new Star Trek movie”
Thats right, there were a lot of people in the theater going “no way” or “wow” when Spock turned around slowly in that icy cave. Seemed like a powerful moment, I am almost sorry for visiting trekmovie.com. A part of me would have liked to have that moment too.
Anyway, Anthony: Keep up the good work!
87 – 88
7. And whatever you do, don’t accept a promotion, or a desk job or anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship :)
Ok, I liked this movie, saw it a second time yesterday… but still want a little more drama and not be SO fast paced…. make it a tiny bit more adult next time..
BTW, Am I the only person in the world who thought that Ang Lee’s “Hulk” was the better of the 2 hulk movies?
For that matter, BSG rocked….
“6. CHRIS ROD – May 11, 2009
ID LIKE TO SEE THAT ENTERPRISE IN THE new TOS BLU RAY”
That is an absolutely horrible idea. Remastered or not, leave the old stuff “classic,” please.
OK- I am all about starship tech. Half of what goes into being a Trekkie is knowing how the ship works. Those who don’t want to, fine, enjoy it your way. I have derived great pleasure from stuff by Franz Joseph and Rick Sternbach since I was a much younger human…
I see there’s a lot of arguing going back and forth here, so I would like to stick my pointed ears in as a neutral observer- the evidence is contradictory, and both sides are presenting visual references which are correct. The size of the shuttle bay, as well as the much larger bridge set would indicate the external portions must be proportionately larger as well, that is simple logic. Yet, looking at the windows, workers on the hull, etc, the ship is about the same size.
I can see the argument in the story for a larger ship- once the behemoth ship which attacked the Kelvin is discovered to be Romulan, Starfleet has to assume the 23rd Century Romulans have developed this monster vessel. (Ironically, if Nero’s crew had just given the ship to the Romulans when they arrived in 2233, they could likely have prevented the destruction of Romulus and brought down the Federation then…) Therefore, the Constitution class project, originally slated for completion in 2245 gets delayed and refurbished. The keels aren’t laid for this ship until later, and the 1701 itself is not completed until the mid to late 2250s (hence the “newest” flagship being unchristened in 2258 when this movie takes place). She has to be bigger and badder than she was originally intended; the Romulans may have something out there beyond belief.
Now, if CBS will authorize a new tech manual, we’ll be able to settle how much bigger and badder the Enterprise truly is.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2009/05/george-lucas-not-happy-about-the-star-trek-box-office-success.html
funny
True Trek#19- Tell your dad that you really, really want to go with him to see this movie, and that if he takes you it will be something you will always remember. That should do it.
94.
Although I could accept readily, based on your logic, a slightly larger 1701–I think the proportions would be a little silly if it were indeed a massive ship (especially since there are only two rows of windows in the rim of the saucer–those would have to be gigantic windows that spanned more than one deck). I think the Kelvin actually works better as a larger ship than the 1701. It has a plodding sort of aircraft carrier feel to it. Larger doesn’t always mean better (defiant?) or more advanced. I think a powerful yet nimble and fast ship would be just as effective. I agree, however, that the interiors that we have seen thus far are more open than previous enterprises (silly brewery engine room with its corrugated metal ceiling and its duct tape-patched beer tanks). This could, however, just be a interior design choice. It could even be, especially in the case of the engine room, an issue of whether or not the 1701 is actually completely finished in its construction when it leaves space dock (yeah, the brand new, brewery tanks without the duct tape, and the ceiling not made of worn in corrugated metal, don’t arrive until Tuesday).
I still think the alternate 1701 is of comparable size to the TOS 1701 that we are used to.
Talk about geeking out.
Nerd hat off.
-P
Maybe I’m crazy but I’m not all that much of a fan of that sketch of the Enterprise (minus the color changes). It kind of looks like you grabbed it from the front and the back and tried to pull it apart some. At the end of the day its not THAT much of a difference from the movie version and to be honest I dont see that many complaints in here about the film version as I did before the movie was released. If the glow from the nacelles were an orage/red color instead of blue, the ship would have been perfect in my eyes. But that’s just MY thoughts so dont gang up on me for that.
On a side note, I took my mom to see Trek last night, she grew up watching it and would rush home just to make sure she didnt miss an episode. Well, remember that scene from the movie where Enterprise rises above Titan, she got so excited seeing that beauty shot of the ship (as did i) that I’ve got to thank JJ and crew for making this movie. My mom said she hasnt had that much fun watching Star Trek since she was a little girl. Not much more that this son, and lifelong fan of Trek could ask for.
I think the ship is bigger and I can believe the 2500ft figure. The windows aren’t necessarily a good indicator of overall size as they could be any size themselves. And I think there are decks in between, above, and below those windows.
As for the shuttlebay, the shuttles are fairly large themselves, at least compared to the original shuttles and those carried aboard the refit. The shuttlebay is certainly larger. And judging from the shuttle numbers, I think ships in this alternate universe carry a lot more shuttles. AND, the hull surrounding the bay opening is larger. The bay opening doesn’t take up as much of that space, AND the bay appears much larger.
And in the shuttle flyby of the saucer, as it’s going around back we see a close up of the saucer. That saucer is THICK. There are certainly more than two decks in the middle.
The warp engines also seem to be rather long, probably making up a significant chunk of that 2500ft figure. Oh, and engineering? Those huge industrial spaces would NOT fit in the original Enterprise or anything shaped like it at the original size. I build ships in Second Life, including a few versions of the Enterprise. One of them is the original but at 150% scale, and I built the engine room and additional engineering rooms and spaces and machinery, and there really isn’t THAT much space. To fit an enlarged shuttlebay and related facilities and all those shuttles, the deflector machinery on the other end, and possibly some crew spaces and misc rooms AND the huge industrial spaces depicted in the movie, within the secondary hull of a ~300m Enterprise is IMPOSSIBLE.
One last point, the Kelvin seems to be quite large as well and the Enterprise is supposed to be bigger. The Kelvin’s saucer is very broad and flat. From experience in building various sized saucers in SL, and from seeing the crew member fly out past one of the turrets, I would say the Kelvin’s saucer is well over 200m; probably 250+, making that larger than the original Enterprise too.
@99 Yeah I totally forgot about the obviously larger Warpengines… though I think the 2500ft are really good as a measurement with the theory of #94 in mind as an addition to your theories :-)
And Idefinitely like the bigger Version myself… it seems more real, I could never imagined how 430 Persons, enough supply, labs, workstations etc. etc. for a FIVE YEAR Mission of exploration could fit in a ship that tiny… ;)
A 2500ft Enterprise is silly. Even though it’s a “reboot”, it’s still an alternate timeline of the 23rd century and I sincerely doubt there’s a feasible explanation as to why is the 1701 suddenly 3 times bigger. But, what the heck, if transporters can now beam from Saturn to Earth, then I guess anything stupid is possible
@101 Temporal Mechanics are complexe… Nero’s Incursion simply had much more impact on the further development of this timeline that just “Kill the Kelvin changing Kirks Background” ;)
Anyhoo, that speaks to me:
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/schematics/stxi_ships.htm
There’s a comparison of TOS, TMP, reboot versions.
If official sources confirm the enormous 2500-3000ft then that’s the last straw and I will no longer have respect for the new movie and it’s writers, as I simply fail to see logic behind the sudden increase in size. 1000ft is big enough even by today’s standards.
NItty-nit nitpicks aside, we should all be greatful that TOS now has a new lease on movie life. Amazing how some are focusing on the minor and overlooking the major benefits and excellence of the movie.
#102 – I fail to see why would the Nero’s Incursion alter only the size of the ship instead of altering, say, its ENTIRE design.
Also, can it be settled by someone in the know, was Nimoy aged in the role with makeup? I don’t see why he would have been, but other photos of him as he is now, he doesn’t look as old as he did in the movie.
#104 – those “minor” stuff is what gave the 43-year old franchise something called “consistency”, and that’s one of the key aspects of ST. It puts the “science” in “science-fiction”. It’s something that attracted many of the fans, myself included.
Then be it so… ‘Jean-Luc’… only because you fail to see logic doesn’t mean there isn’t one… heck we’re Trekkies we’re making the most stuff out on our selves or find explanations for things on ourselves… so why’s so hard to accept a decent theory like #94 had in addition to visual indications noted from #99…
And there is nothing like “Big Enough” ;-)
73.
Everyone enjoys things differently. I think a lot of Star Trek fans (myself included, at times) enjoy Star Trek at face value, but don’t truly enjoy it until they look at it with a microscope, magnifying glass and a ruler. I think delving into the details can be a way of showing your full enjoyment of, well, anything. From art, to literature, to movies, there has always been a human drive to think critically, analyze and interpret. I will admit, sometimes it goes overboard, but I think its something that all intelligent people do. Just because you may do it with something else (say sports, for instance–maybe you spend hours looking over stats for players) doesn’t mean that you are any “cooler” or less of a “nerd” than anyone else. I realize that you are not insulting anyone and are genuinely curious as to why people geek out on Star Trek. I completely understand. I find it curious when people geek out on other stuff, but I don’t call them out on it because I know I have my geek things as well.
So, what are you WAY into? I’m sure there is something.
Of course, it doesn’t matter what the size of the enterprise is, or who is right or wrong, but it is fun (as long as it doesn’t devolve into a personal battle of who can craft the best insult without using expletives) to discuss.
Word.
-P
Ah come on Jean-Luc… are you actually arguing that “changing the size” will disrupt “Consistency” in a frakkin’ Alternate Timeline?
Hear it… ALTERNATE TIMELINE… You’re consistency and your “science” is nowhere near to be touched!
Oh no Thasc!!! We’ve brought the debate over here too!! lol
I’m stayin’ out of this one, though. It’s 900 meters. And we’ll just have to wait for an official book or statement.
#110 I wasn’t referring specifically to the size of the ship in *that* post, but to the stuff considered to be “minor” in general.
> You’re consistency and your “science” is nowhere near to be touched!
I beg to differ. Transwarp beaming, beaming from Saturn to Earth, come on. I guess we won’t even need starships in ST12…
@111 762m considering the Experience the Enterprise page :P
Gotta weigh in on the ship -
Let’s think about simple proportions for a minute. The average human is about six feet in height. The average ceiling height of a typical room is eight feet, and an average door is seven feet in height. Let’s take those proportions and run with them for a minute. If the deck height on the Enterprise is eight feet, with eleven decks in the primary hull, that would be eighty-eight feet. Now, let’s consider the between-decks space, because that’s where all of the piping, wiring, air ducts, etc. would have to run. (A lot of it runs through the walls, too, but not all of it.) Let’s assume a standard water pipe is eight inches (supply and return), and if we use fiber optics for comms/power, those bundles can be pretty small, maybe a couple of inches in diameter. Air ducting, though, will probably have to be at least six, and possibly eight, inches in order to move a lot of air and keep it fresh. So we’re talking a between-decks height of probably around twelve to fourteen inches – let’s make it 12 for argument’s sake. So there’s another ten feet (no ‘tween-decks above Deck 1 or below Deck 11), which now brings us to 98 feet. Add in the thickness of the floor/ceiling on each deck (probably at least an inch, maybe two) and any additional bracing, and now you’re getting closer to the originally-postulated thickness of around 125 feet for the primary hull (and we need to count the height/depth of the domes on the dorsal/ventral surfaces). So if the primary hull is 125 feet thick, given the existing proportions, it makes sense that it would be somewhere between 400 and 425 feet in diameter. (Possibly more, if you need either a thicker exterior hull and/or storage space in the outer hull areas.)
So, if we use that as our baseline, it stands to reason that any ship designed with the proportions of either the TV ship or the new movie ship would be somewhere between 1000 and 1250 feet long – or approximately 330-400 meters.
What gets me about the new ship is that proportions seem all over the board. The hangar bay seems cavernous (big enough to stack shuttles two high with room to spare), yet the escape pod in which Spock fires Kirk to the surface of Delta Vega seems waaay too big – given the size shown, an average human laying down would stretch almost the width of the dorsal neck!
I’m sure some bright boy (or girl) will devise a set of blueprints of the new ship that make sense, but for now that was one of the things that I just didn’t get about the new movie. The big E is as much a character as the others, and should be treated as such, not as just another contrivance that can be shaped to fit the need at hand.
108.
I agree. I don’t think the size of the ship should alter our enjoyment of the film. I’d be more comfortable with a 1000 ft design, but a 2500 ft design wouldn’t preclude me enjoying the film, or any of the subsequent flims. It could even have interesting, and ultimately positive, ramifications to the story if it were a larger ship (things I haven’t thought of yet). As for “official” sources, they have always had varying degrees of accuracy; some have even been completely contradictory. Meh, it is what ever it turns out to be–it is fun to speculate though.
-P
Oh, yeah, and I’m hoping in the sequel they add a throwaway line to the effect that the Enterprise had to put back into spacedock for final finishes on the engineering hull, which was woefully under-constructed before the ship’s maiden voyage (remember, it was pressed into service to answer the distress call from Vulcan).
No more breweries as Engineering, please, JJ! Let’s bring the rest of the ship into the 23rd Century.
So again…how old was Archer’s beagle when the transporter incident happened with Scotty?
117.
He put his brain in a robot body…wouldn’t you?
*cue sealab exploding*
-P
#117—-It is ridiculous to assume that the beagle in question is the same one aboard the NX-01. Jonathan Archer obviously had a love for those dogs, and likely had several more after Porthos.
I am still trying to get my mind around the “Alternate Reality”, I guess if you take it as is as the the Star Trek classic universe is in tack and will move along without any more information about it fine. And all movies and whatever comes next are in this new Reality fine, but, I dont care what universe you are in the engineering department was very poorly done, the whole ship is state of the art of the 23rd century and the engineering area is right out of the 1990’s?
I liked the movie, and have come to terms with the new direction (dont like the Vulcan part) but really for the next movie create a better engineering department, that whole part really showed me that some detail were not thought through.
Over all I liked it as a great sci-fi movie, as far as Star Trek it is a movie that will need to stand on its own and not compaired to the other since it is too different (apples and organges people, alliens and gorn)
sorry about the spelling mistakes, I have been up all night and forgot to double check it
#120—-I think that the previous timeline (ENT-NEM) is what stands on its own.
This altered timeline is the one in which future canonical stories are likely to be told. ST09 has simply opened a door to new adventures.
I don’t think it is a great sci-fi movie, as really only one Star Trek movie ever has been (TMP). I do, however, believe that ST09 has taken its place among the best Star Trek movies…and there is a difference.
120.
I agree with you on the engineering set. I (and 116 as well) have sort of devised a possible, and passable, explanation for the way it looks in this movie. The industrial feel is actually not bad, but it was poorly, and sloppily, executed. A sleeker combination of the 23rd century and the “bowels of a ship” feel would be fine with me.
Nerd hat off.
-P
If the ship is indeed bigger, I still would like to hear a VALID reasoning behind this from the producers (not just “we thought it would be kewl to make it bigger”).oh well.
Why can’t you just accept like anyone else or make up a reasoning for yourself?
124.
Agreed. They seem like, for the most part, the “valid reason” type, so if it is, you probably will.
-P
First, let me say I liked the film & was completely entertained, but I found the script lacking in many respects as well as a bit contrived.
1. Kirk should have been the one urging Bones to think of a way to get him on the ship, not the other way around. (and they ran way too long with the gag about the side effects.)
2. I don’t care how pissed off Spock was with Kirk, do any of us really believe he would have abandoned a Starfleet officer on such a harsh planet, unarmed, where he could have been killed by those creatures? C’mon , some establishment should have been made about the planet being close by where a federation outpost was located). And what about the fact that this just happened to be the polace where Nero abandoned Spock & Scotty happened to be stationed there. This scenario totally pissed my wife off to no end.
3. Kirk’s flippant actions during the Kobiasi Maru excercise was totally out of character.
4. There should have been more background established for Nero’s revenge against Spock.
5. The entire bridge crew just sttod around while Spock tried his best to kill Kirk. No one really tried to intervene until Sarek did. Where eas Bones cry that, you’re killing him, Spock?” Also, couldn’t they have let Kirk win one fight. He got the crap beat out of him 3 times in this film.
6. I thought the relationship between Spock & Uhura should have been more subtle. The open affection by Spock was absurd for his character.
7. I certainly didn’t get any goosebump moments & I get them easily watching movie. No watery eyes either, whether for happiness or sorrow.
8. I think JJ is an excellent director but it almost seems like this was phoned in. I mean, it’s almost like he wasn’t present during the editing because he missed a lot of opportunities to punch it up.
9. As much as I love Uhura & Zoe Saldano, her role in the film was way to large. I really believe the focus should have been on Kirk, Spock, McCoy & Scotty with Sulu i& Uhura in secondary roles. Chekov not should not have been in the this film at all. The Enterprise itself was almost a minor player.
10. I know the altered timeline has made a lot of changes with many things, but unless you provide a little more explanation through the script it gets lost in the shuffle.
11. The music was not dramatic in the least.
Maybe I’ll like it better the second time around.
I’d love to see Nimoy get a Best Actor nomination .. and win… for this movie. That would be grand. Actually, right now, Star Trek is the Best Picture of the Year.
#19: My 12 year old son and I saw it over the weekend and for 2 hours we were both the same age (um, I mean 12, not 46). My son has had some exposure to TOS and all the other shows and even had the pleasure of sitting in Capt. Janeway’s chair while just a toddler, but he still had tears in his eyes when the final credits rolled for this film. And the two of us babbled on like geeks for the rest of the day.
If you can’t get out to play catch for a few hours, I can think of worse ways for a father and son to spend the day.
And I’d like a full-size model of the new Enterprise when it’s available, please. :-)
#124—-Why?
What would make this any different from the dozens of fanon explanations for any other potential inconsistency?
Perhaps the survivors from the USS Kelvin were able to extract and recover information about the Narada’s technology and pass it along in 2233. Perhaps some of this was incorporated into the design of the Enterprise and it was necessary for this incarnation of the NCC-1701 to be a bit larger to accomodate.
This was Bob Orci’s explanation for the more advanced technology in this film. Why not to explain a variance in overall size of the Enterprise in one timeline versus another?
There is more than two decades between the initial timeline incursion and the launch of the Enterprise. None of that should be difficult to reconcile at all.
@124
How about “Based upon the reports from the surviving crew of the Kelvin about the superior firepower of the vessel encountered [the Narada] and the uncertainty of whether it was a new class of ship (and quantum increase.in threat capability), it became a recognition that a new Starfleet vessel – with substantial increases in performance, emplaced support craft and firepower – would have to designed and built. In a fleet with (albeit) **heavy** cruisers, a true battleship was needed to respond to the return of this vessel (since there were no eyewitness statements/records to confirm the full destruction of the enemy vessel) or the potential of addition vessels of this class.
# 127
Oh brother.
Did they put too much butter on your popcorn too?
Next time you see it, leave your clipboard at home and bring your imagination.
It’s fiction folks, have a little fun.
130.
It shouldn’t be necessary, in my opinion (though an explanation will probably surface at some point), for enjoyment of the film. This movie seems, again, in my opinion, more about the characters (and getting them together at this point in their lives in any way possible), the acting and the script/dialogue and less about the technology doodads, original plot or plausibility. In this regard, it was a complete success. Many of the producers/writers seem to be nit-pickers as well and will probably have an explanation for most things, including ship size, etc.
-P
I didn’t care for the rapid ascension of Kirk from cadet to captain. That totally stretches the bounds of believability. I also felt it was unnecessary to the story. Everything in the story could have been accomplished by these young characters without promoting him to captain in 2258. Even if the writers had wanted to end the story with Kirk and everyone else in their familiar positions on the bridge, this could have been done with a leap forward in time at the end. At least then the audience could have assumed that Kirk would have matured a bit over the next few years.
Unfortunately, Kirk is nothing but vindicated for all of his behavior—which not only encompasses disobeying orders, but disrespecting superior officers, both in a formal hearing on his behavior during the KM test and on the bridge of a starship (where he displays nothing short of a total lack of respect for authority and chain of command). Everyone around Kirk is humbled before him, yet he is never humbled himself (which is something I believe would only have endeared him more to the audience).
I can think of two instances where Kirk Prime clearly disobeyed orders—-”Amok Time” and TSFS. In both cases, it was to save the life of Spock.
The first case ended up okay only due to the interference of T’Pau on behalf of the Enterprise. The second resulted in formal charges and demotion (and would have been alot worse if they had not saved the planet on the way home). In neither instance was he actually rewarded for disobeying orders.
I understand completely that he is unrefined and not yet fully developed (all the more reason that he should not yet be made a captain, IMO). I just wanted to see something, even if only a tiny bit of growth within him between his behavior toward a superior officer (twice) and gaining a starship command—-something which demonstrates that he knows the difference between a great leader who is unafraid to bend the rules and a loose cannon.
Kirk’s development is my only issue with the film.
It was—overall—a terrific experience.
#133—Agreed.
I don’t care much for technical detail anyway. I’ve never purchased a fictitious technical manual. My love for Trek has always been about the great characters and good storytelling of the TOS/original film era.
I found the movie to do a good job overall of capturing the essence of these characters. I only found Kirk’s development in this film to be a bit lacking.
But I was thoroughly entertained, something Star Trek has failed to do for me in large part since 1986, to be quite honest.
#83 just by looking at the image above, visually you can see that the nacelles are not as wide and as large as the new Enterprise in the movie.
I have no clue what the measurements are, I’m just going by the visual evidence.
I think it’s funny too, we are putting so much effort into trying to figure out a fictional space ship. Can you imagine if we put all of this brain power to work on getting astronauts to the Moon or Mars?
After watching the movie for a 2nd time. The only question I have is why would there be a 2nd lighting storm in the atmosphere of Vulcan? Did the Narada pop out from another black hole? Or was the black hole that Spock Prime came out of near Vulcan?
Many of you are the beneficiaries of those who plot out the stats of starships and such. Videogames, books, future films, RPGs, etc. all try to stay consistent with each other (the quality ones, that is). Remember those wonderful 3D illustrations and video of the new Enterprise and Kelvin by Tobias Richter? That kind of stuff comes from taking the time (or referring to published material) to get the measurements right. If the debate were between 300m and 350m, it wouldn’t be a big deal. 300 vs 750 vs 900 meters though? Some consider it a big deal. Just sayin’.
The movie has plot holes, yes. But the suspension of disbelief is strong and robust in every moment. In my opinion, this is due to good and professional filmmaking.
Sidenote: thinking about Spock Prime, you know, I felt that the new actors were so good, and the storytelling was so strong, that the presence of Leonard Nimoy was somewhat unnecessary. This is not to criticize Nimoy’s performance, just a compliment to the new cast & crew for being able to walk on their legs.
#137. It was Spocks Arrival that caused the 2nd lightning storm and of corse the narada was there so they thought that was them and Kirk was right. Also in Sulu makeing a little mistake that gave them just enough time for kirk to get to the bridge and warn Capt Pike of what was going to happen.
The Movie was fantastic and after seeing it 4 times now and once on Imax i am just amazed at how incredable a movie it is. The only nitpicking i have with the Movie is some of the Sets. Like Engeneering. Using the Industrieal seetings was just not right and looked not very believable. But aside from that everything was fantastic. The Action and drama and susopense was great. I loved the seen whrn the Big E came to the rescue of Kirk and Spock and firing all weapons. a truly classic scene. at the end seeing Kirk and Spock together on the bridge talking to Nero was one of the best scenes.
@137
I had the impression that it was the entry of Spock Prime in the ‘Jellyfish’.
I, change of subject, don’t care one way or the other about the ‘actual’ dimensions of the nuEnterprise. Size doesn’t matter.
138.
True. I do like things to be known and constant as well. Once a decision is made, or a number for the size of the ship is determined, I would like to know it and for it to stay that way. However, if that decision or determination is different from the one I have made, via my eyeballs and my own aesthetics, I will still enjoy the film. I am all for discussing what it could be, and for trying to discern from visual evidence specific details, but the final answer won’t make the characters any less good. It might be unfortunate if it doesn’t meet my notions, but it won’t ruin things for me.
I am sincerely grateful for all of the work artists and model builders do–they make this stuff textural and give us a solid foundation from which the stories can be told.
-P
Star Trek pulls in $7.6 million on Monday. That’s over $2 million more than what Wolverine got it’s first Monday. Star Trek is now at $86.8 million.
Ryan Church’s Enterprise art
Why the ripoff of Star Trek TOS? If you are going to redesign the ship, then REDESIGN THE SHIP! Otherwise, just use the original. The changes are not worthy of the Credit given.
How about “Ryan Church’s vison of Matt Jeffries’ original Enterprise Art.”
I know I would never get away with copying someone else’s art without a nod to the original.
Ryan Church’s Enterprise art? Please.
!130 Closettrekker- “This was Bob Orci’s explanation for the more advanced technology in this film.”
Interesting. When was this mentioned? I had theorized a while back that it would have been logical for Starfleet to utilize whatever Narada/Borgian tech they could have gleaned from the Kelvin incident in the R&D of future starships.
Of course, this is all icing on the cake, because despite breweries, lame science, plotholes, etc., the movie simply rocks and has become the new benchmark, IMO.
Ryan- if you’re out there- Your rendering is beautiful. Very balanced.
What happened in the translation and why the change to blue nacelle domes?
The only scene I had problems with was Kirk’s careless attitude during the last KM test. He should have at least made it believeable, defeating the ships with briliant tactics, and not so obvious it was all a joke and cheat. But, maybe they wrote it that waym and he was just making a point… but not how I envisioned it going.
Star Trek: the coming together of the crew dealing with a rogue Romulan from the future.
Star Trek 2: the re introduction to the Klingons and the Empire war with the Federation, more advanced tech due to Nero, ie Klingon armada fleet destroyed, upping R&D by Klingon Empire and Bio weapons, tying in McCoy/Spock/Kirk centric story. Chekov and Sulu near death/death.
Star Trek 3: Khan is introduced with the city on the edge of forever concept/mirror mirror.
Spock has a chance to save his mother and Vulcan but with causality consequences, epic submarine battle between Enterprise and Kelvin type ship.
134:
Closet:
“Unfortunately, Kirk is nothing but vindicated for all of his behavior—which not only encompasses disobeying orders, but disrespecting superior officers, both in a formal hearing on his behavior during the KM test and on the bridge of a starship (where he displays nothing short of a total lack of respect for authority and chain of command). Everyone around Kirk is humbled before him, yet he is never humbled himself (which is something I believe would only have endeared him more to the audience).”
You sound like the Federation President from STIV, but you haven’t presented the “certain extenuating circumstances” which clear Kirk for his “first, best destiny.” I think the writers realize this. But he did save the Earth, and when Kirk does that in “Trek,” he gets to be Captain, whether via promotion or demotion.
#146—”Interesting. When was this mentioned? ”
Bob said it on AICN’s trek talkback.
#150—-I don’t have any fundamental problem with Kirk being made a captain in this film (although I would have preferred his formal promotion to be depicted as a few years later).
I only wish that he had demonstrated that at some point he realized the difference between being willing to bend the rules to get the job done and a total lack of discipline.
We saw him demonstrate behavior towards a superior officer that Kirk himself would never have tolerated from his own subordinates, and without ever being humbled by or the least bit introspective about it, he is handed the keys to the Enterprise at the end of the film.
It isn’t unforgiveable by any means. I love this movie. But there is always something which could have been done better. And this is really my only gripe.
#146—-Here is Bob’s direct quote from that conversation:
“Certainly one would expect that the fleeing shuttles carrying survivors would also carry whatever telemetry was recorded by the Kelvin in its final moments ( like an airplanes BLACK BOX). Imagine the wealth of information that Starfleet was exposed to from scans of the Narada.”
Certainly the Narada’s attack upon the Kelvin is the catalyst for alot of what unfolds differently between 2233-2255 (when we first get a look at the Enterprise).
It would also supplement the intelligence information the Federation already possesses about the Romulans, since the survivors would also be able to pass along information on their physical appearance, etc. I assume that the Kelvin’s universal translator recognized Ayel’s language as being Romulan, a language already in the databanks dating back to the treaty negotiations that ended the Earth-Romulan War in the 22nd Century.
Kirk is humbled in this movie when he meets Spock Prime and realizes that that
A) He is not just a punk kid, but has a great destiny as a great leader
and
B) He can’t achieve that destiny unless he becomes friends with young Spock who is in as much pain as he is.
#154—-That’s good point. It’s still a little light, IMO, but I suppose it technically qualifies.
It is hard even for me to imagine, but I’ve still only seen the film once. A family emergency interrupted my plans to see it a second time over the weekend.
Funny that the crew of the new movie were kind enough to all show up at Shatner’s big do….but he snubbed the premiere.
#156—-I was wondering when someone would mention that.
lol.
Im sorry, but the bottom line is they messed with the freaking timeline and and rendered the old timeline nonexistent. That breaks the promise JJ made to the fans that he would not mess with canon. Had I known they were going to wipe out the history of Star Trek completely, I would have begged them to alter little things instead. Just think of all the events that never happen because of this movie. In Star Trek 3 and 4 the crew used Vulcan as a refuge. What about all the other Vulcans that have been featured in other films and the shows? I am really surprised that fans have gone along with this. I do not think Gene Roddenberry would have approved of the canon destruction either. Now I cannot watch the other Treks and see them the same way again without thinking that this event cant happen or this event cant happen either. I had no problem with Kirks father dying, I thought that was part of the story anyway but when they destroyed Vulcan they went way too far. I understand that they wanted to appeal to a broader audience but they could have done it without changing everything. And I was not crazy about the Spock/Uhura thing either. That was utterly rediculous. In my mind Shatner should be happy that he was not in this movie because everything he has done to make the character of Kirk has now been voided.
SDF – um, no they didn’t. The old timeline is still there ala the Mirror Universe. This is a NEW timeline in a NEW universe. Everyone we already saw still happened.
#158—”the bottom line is they messed with the freaking timeline and and rendered the old timeline nonexistent. ”
No it doesn’t. It just exists in another timeline.
“That breaks the promise JJ made to the fans that he would not mess with canon.”
The potential for the creation of an alternate timeline as a result of interference with the past has been canon since the first season of TOS.
“I am really surprised that fans have gone along with this.”
Why wouldn’t we go along with the opportunity to be told new stories where the fates of the characters are no longer sealed?
40 years was a long time for that timeline to play out—and make no mistake—it did.
I still love TOS, and I still love the first 4 films.
But I like this one too, and I look forward to seeing how this timeline plays out as well.
#125 – Star Trek is not about “making up explanations yourself”. That’s why we have/had TNG Tech Manual, memory alpha etc. I would just like to know the official thing and I certainly hope they have someone to track those “minor details” and maintain consistency within any future releases (be it movies or TV series) aboard
158. I had that same feeling, albeit tempered a bit with my enjoyment of the actual characters in the film (as well as the script), and the way they slipped right into their parts giving us a different but oh so familiar view of their characters. The ho-hum story and improbability of a multitude of events also colored my initial reaction (not to mention the destruction of Vulcan). It took me until the next day to really fully enjoy the film. The two hints about this being an alternate universe (preserving the prime timeline from whence old Spock came), although far too brief, helped me immensely. Without the 40+ years of the Star Trek that got us here, this movie wouldn’t exist, and these events wouldn’t occur. To say that this universe no longer exists just doesn’t work. There is, in my mind, the prime universe, the mirror universe, and now this universe. Who is to say Spock didn’t transcend both time and dimensions? That is the intent of this film I believe. Again, this movie does not preclude the events that we are all familiar with. Events, mind you, that are fictional, if still meaningful to us, anyway.
Buck up. All is well.
I wouldn’t be surprised if, at some point, someone picked up where the countdown comics left off (in canon!) in parallel with these new films. Both will continue. I am excited for the future of both. I understand your disappointment–I shared it (and some part of me is still a little irked that TPTB changed some things I didn’t think needed to be changed) at first. The movie is really pretty good though, and the characters are pretty spot on–isn’t that what matters most?
-P
-P
161:
Jean-Luc:
If you don’t have it, go pick up the Star Trek Timeline by Mike & Denise Okuda, or any of the Tech manuals/blueprints by Franz Joseph, and (I believe) Rick Sternbach for the 24th century stuff.
The Okudas were very good at ‘fixing’ canon holes, and ’supposing’ ways to fix inconsistencies.
I hope the new film has the same level of attention to detail.
#163 – My thoughts exactly about the Okudas. I just hope they won’t have to hire another pair of “Okudas” after 3 new movies. Learn from the past and get it right (ie. maintain consistency) from the very beginning.
#163—”The Okudas were very good at ‘fixing’ canon holes, and ’supposing’ ways to fix inconsistencies.”
I’d like to have that job.
#118.
NICE!
Closet, what’s your email address? I got something cool to send ya.
#163 – We detailed a lot of Trek science and technology in various manuals and blueprints and consulting for the writers and producers, and we did try to reconcile as much as we could. In 15 years of doing this stuff (over 1000 pages of writer tech notes and a buhzillion drawings) we have had a lot of supporters, both fans and respectable rocket scientists alike, so I think we came out of the “modern Trek” era with a damned good batting average. However, there are bound to be little bits of conflicting information, either from mis-typed or mis-spoken dialogue lines, mis-remembered tech notes, etc. We did what we could, and I believe Trek has come out better for it. We didn’t push technobabble on anyone, we just gave the writers terms and supporting explanations to work with. Michael Piller once complimented us (myself and Mike Okuda) for the work we did on some thorny Borg issues by saying “Well, you’re figured out Acts 3, 4, and 5. Want to do Teaser, 1 and 2?” Which tells me we did our part.
As to those issues that fans might bicker about, I’ve become very philosophical. I’ll give you what I said over on the Drex Files in my best Laurence Fishburne/Morpheus voice: “Trek is what is in your own mind, following a set of stylistic rules. There is no canon. If I modify a nacelle component to perform a more sensible function, can it not be so? If I create a new deflector dish using these rules, is it not as valid as the dish that came before? Do you think that is a real starship you’re building, in this place?”
There is a lot left to do in the Star Trek universe, but you still have to know the rules. :)
Im not saying the movie was bad. I enjoyed the characters and the story but they could have left Vulcan be and still tell stories of the young Kirk and Spock without creating an alternate timeline. In many Treks that involve time travel, does the timeline not become an alternate one as well. This whole thing just confuses me even more. When we watch Star Trek, are we watching a many different alternate timelines every time time travel occurs? This movie changed things for me. I cannot see Trek the same.
#167—mikehalv@hotmail.com
About the Edselprise’s size, I have seen the movie twice now ,once in Imax! I have been on cruises on two of the largest ocean liners in the world. The QM2 and Freedom of the Seas. From what I have seen on screen when the Edselprise is under construction and Kirk joins the cadets on the shuttle( which is just about the same size as a life boat on either the QM2 or Freedom ) There is no way it is larger than either of thoses two ocean going vessels. NO WAY! There is a scale problem somewhere.
#144 – Josh: Do you mind sharing your source of information? I cannot find it… Thanks!
The new E IS waaaaaaaaaaay bigger than the original. Way bigger.
The new bridgecap has two decks (see the 2 high portholes on either side of the cap. In the film you see tiny people in there, where as the old one had room for only one deck, The aft section of this new bridgecap also apparently is large enough to incorporate an officers lounge.
The new Hanger bay is far bigger as well. Don’t judge the forced persepective of the shuttle coming out. Look at the scene where the cadets first enter the hanger bay you see many many more shuttles stacked on either side of the deck. The original did not have the space for this and had room for only one shuttle at a time on the back of the flightdeck. or two but running the length of the ship. this one has shuttles facing one another on each side plus room for an entire flight deck in between. And when the shuttles land they crewmen on the deck look like specs.
The sets we saw below decks, water reclamation, Uhura’s listening station, and the Laverne and Shirley beer factory engineering are too vast in scale to fit in the dimensions of the original secondary hull.
In the original teaser image of the ship being built we see that the outer saucer rim has interior space for four decks the original outer saucer had space for only two.
Unless they didn’t pay close attention or fudged to the size of the sets, effects and interiors compared with the actual outer dimensions of the ship, this Enterprise is Galaxy class sized, no doubt about it.
#169 – The destruction of Vulcan was painful for me to watch as well but I think the reason the filmmakers did that was to show that in this timeline, things are not set in stone and there are still real dangers. It would have been dramatically hollow if absolutely nothing came of Nero’s villainy.
In spite of that, by the end of the movie its clear there are still Vulcans, their culture still survives and Spock has already located a new homeworld and is personally involved in the reconstruction of their society. So even in the face of that great loss, there is hope and optimism, two of the cornerstones of Trek.
And for all the Kirk naysayers, its also important to remember the scene near the end of the movie where, after having defeated Nero’s plans, Kirk offers to beam his crew aboard. He shows compassion and a willingness to do the right thing, even in the face of the evil that he has seen (well, at least until Nero spits at his gesture). Again, hope and optimism, and a real sign that this Jim Kirk has grown up.
For all the things the movie changed, scenes like those showed me that at its heart, this was still the Star Trek I grew up with.
161. ‘Jean-Luc’ – May 12, 2009
“Star Trek is not about “making up explanations yourself”.
Um, Yes, yes it is. From pretending to beam down to the strange new world in your back yard as a kid to Franz Joseph, to the armies of fan fic writers to the vast archives of Fanon. Star Trek is the very grist for the mill of the imagination.
JMN
#173 – It’s weirdities like this that tell me we’re not ever going to see any official Simon & Schuster publications revealing the interiors or talking about the ship the way we were able to with TNG or DS9 (setting aside the ship specs problems with the latter). The tech manual days are over. We’ll probably see some calendars featuring the ship exteriors and set/cast photos, though.
#158 “Now I cannot watch the other Treks and see them the same way again without thinking that this event cant happen or this event cant happen either.”
My condolences. I’ll have no problem watching my favortie 79 episodes again and again as I have for the last 30 years. Nothing has changed aside from the addition of a great new 2 hour alternate TOS adventure. Well, that and the fact that I’m WAY more excited about Star Trek than I have been in 20 years.
172 – well, it’s up on box office mojo now. The $7.6 million was an estimate I guess. The actuals for Monday are $7,502,026:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/chart/?sortdate=2009-05-11&p=.htm
Something’s bothering me – please tell me if you agree. At the end of the movie, Nimoy Spock tells his younger self that he’s going to join the effort to rebuild the Vulcan race (thus, freeing Quinto Spock to stay in Starfleet). This means that Nimoy Spock is simply accepting the new, screwed up timeline, which shouldn’t even exist (and in which his homeworld is destroyed)! I think this is ridiculous. Wouldn’t Nimoy Spock want to do anything possible to CORRECT the timeline, like he and others had done a zillion times in the past when similar screw-ups occurred??? (e.g. City on the Edge of Forever, All Our Yesterdays, Yesterday’s Enterprise, first Contact, the DS9 episode where Sisko went back in time to the Enterprise in the Trouble With Tribbles episode, etc.).
There’s no way old Spock would just accept the new timeline unless it was “supposed” to be that way (which it obviously isn’t). Hopefully, this will be the plot in the sequel (JJ did set it up, especially with Kirk asking old Spock if he knew his father in the other timeline….).
#177—Agreed.
And I watched “Where No Man Has Gone Before” last night. Nothing was different about the way I enjoyed the story.
Those events will not occur in the altered timeline, but they still do in the previous timeline.
I fail to see the problem.
I got the comparative wolverine numbers from here:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=wolverine.htm
It did only $5,451,023 ($2.1 million less) on it’s first Monday.
Star Trek also doing better than Batman Begins on first Monday, though Batman Begins had a smaller % drop from it’s opening weekend numbers:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=batmanbegins.htm
179 – a couple points
1) There is no “correct’ timeline per se since this is a DIFFERENT timeline from the one we’ve seen before. THAT timeline is unchanged
2) How exactly is Spock supposed to go back and fix it?
Ricky S
I wants me a cutaway like the one I had when I was 3 of the TMP E. I think Kimball did it
182 Josh.
exactly. Spock did not BUILD the time machine (if you read countdown). And besides that is 24th century tech which the 23rd century cannot possibly build. And if we posit he is in an alternate universe, how is he supposed to get back to the “Prime” universe with no data.
I am excited about this new time line. Things can be different or similar to the Prime universe, it just depends on what the writers what to do. Reading all of the complaints about how 40 years of Star Trek has been erased is tiresome. The Prime Star Trek universe still exists. The way I look at it is, once the Narada arrived everything that was going to happen has been changed. So that means Spock Prime should have never existed since the Prime time line would have been erased. Now I could be wrong but this is my basic understanding of time travel.
I accept this new time line much like I accept Marvel’s Ultimate line of comics. Yes they are not the main Marvel Universe. But they do what the new Star Trek movie has done which is update something for modern times. And if you don’t like this new universe you still have the Prime Universe to go back to.
#179—”Hopefully, this will be the plot in the sequel .”
Not likely. Damon Lindelof made clear that they are done with time travel.
Here’s the problem (as I see it) with your theory on what Spock Prime’s attitude toward the new timeline should be.
He is, himself, a product of an altered timeline. If you recall, he is only alive in the Original Series because “Cousin Selek” saved his life in Vulcan’s Forge.
Moreover, why would Spock assume that the previous timeline is the only “correct” one?
Also, he has allowed tragedy to occur before, despite his knowledge of time travel. Did he go back in time to prevent the destrction of the USS Intrepid? The death of his friend, James Kirk?
His incursion into the past (along with Nero’s) is an unwilling one, but one for which he feels responsible. So to Spock Prime, what’s done is done. He feels beholden to the people of this timeline now. That’s why he is staying to pick up the pieces.
I’m not sure how his actions would be viewed if he were to attempt to go back in time just to stop the Narada earlier. And moreover, who is going to agree to help him? He isn’t a god. He’s just a man. If he were going to do that, then why not change everything else he considers tragic? I’ll tell you why—-because for every action, there is a consequence. If he were to try and change the past here (even with good intentions), who is to say he would not mess something else up, and who is he to say that these people deserve to be saved and others do not?
I like that he is staying to help pick up the pieces.
#176 “The tech manual days are over”
I’m not sure this is a bad thing. Don’t get me wrong, I love tech stuff, but in recent years Trek relied too much on blueprints and schematics. Time to go back to some fantasy and imagination.
Josh – I hear what you’re saying about the viewpoint that this is only a “different” timeline, but in all other similar cases, such a circumstance has been determined to be an “incorrect” timeline. Because our original Trek timeline was disrupted simply because of Nero’s appearance and his subsequent destruction of the Kelvin, that means that this new timeline shouldn’t have ever come to pass. It’s “incorrect,” and should be fixed (just as in Yesterday’s Enterprise, and the many other examples I cited).
I guess you could argue that Nero was “supposed” to go back in time when that black hole sucked him in, but I don’t buy that one. If so, Yesterday’s Enterprise and all those other episodes would be invalid as well.
As for how Spock can fix it, that’s simple (in ST terms, anyhow). The writers can come up with many possibilities. To name one: both Spocks and Kirk go back in time 25 years and close up the black hole before the Kelvin ever diverts there to investigate the anomaly…. Or, to make it more fun, Nimoy Spock can wait about 40 years and finally decide with now-old Kirk (played by Shatner) to go and fix the timeline. This would be silly, because there’s no reason to wait, but hey, it would be fun.
#188—”I hear what you’re saying about the viewpoint that this is only a “different” timeline, but in all other similar cases, such a circumstance has been determined to be an “incorrect” timeline.”
Then the timeline with which we are all familiar is also ‘incorrect’, since its existence depends upon an older Spock saving the child Spock in “Yesteryear”. If you recall, the reason no one recognized him upon his initial return from the Guardian was that his absence from the scenario in the Vulcan desert caused him to die as a child.
The bigger point is, why would you want them to open the door for new adventures the way they have without the hinderance of already sealed fates for the characters, only to turn around and close it again?
If I were you, I wouldn’t hold my breath for that one.
186 – thanks for the response. I disagree, though. This is not a situation where Spock would use time travel to just change an unhappy event (e.g. Kirk dying, the Intrepid being destroyed, etc.). Such things happened naturally. In the cases where bad stuff has happened because of an unnatural incursion by a time traveler, however, Spock and others have always gone back to fix the unnatural cause of the problem (again, see Yesterday’s Enterprise, City on the Edge of Forever, Tomorrow is Yesterday, etc.).
Because he would be setting straight what was messed up by an unnatural event, plenty of people (Kirk included) would want to help him. Kirk especially so, since he knows he’s supposed to grow up with his dad.
#188 “As for how Spock can fix it, that’s simple (in ST terms, anyhow). The writers can come up with many possibilities.”
Fact is, the writers introduced a new timeline for a purpose: to reboot the franchise and have a whole new setting for unpredictable new TOS stories. Why should they want to fix it? That would me totally illogical :)
it was “that would BE totally…” in my previous post.
#187 – Focusing solely on the techy stuff is not what it should be about, no. But it’s the clever Trek writer who can integrate the human aspect with the technological. Ever since the franchise began, it prided itself on presenting stories and characters and the promise of a technological future that made the audience -think-. We didn’t always have that in episodic television, but modern Trek certainly did its share of engaging human stories working with technology. It isn’t Woodland Trek, it’s Star Trek, and it’s space-based. Space involves high technology, and there’s no way to escape that. Lord of the Rings is fantasy. Like the best novels, the best plays, and even the best comic books, the best SF films and TV shows should have multiple layers to examine. Simple entertainment is fine; I prefer something more, and in Trek, it’s great to have well thought out science and technology as well as characters and story. As for publications specifically, there’s plenty of Trek fiction out there for those who want to read it, and perhaps there will be the occasional book of images and graphics.
189 – thanks again. I hear you. I’m not holding my breath. I must say, though, that it’s tough to use the books as canon. There are so many stories, and so many permutations, that doing so is impossible. Indeed, look how First Contact completely contradicted the book version of the same events…. (btw, I’m assuming that you’ve quoted the books – pardon me if I’m mistaken). When excluding the books, then, the initial timeline is the “correct” one.
#20…your logic is flawed, using Shuttlebay references to project the lengtth of Enterprise…the ratio between shuttle and shuttlebay is the same as TOS because the shuttles are huge compared to TOS shuttles…probably bigger even than DS9 runabouts and VOYAGER’s Delta Flyer…MUCH bigger…
191 – I like the idea of “new” stories, and the new timeline is a good vehicle for that. I love the Trek that I’ve watched for 40 years, though, and I personally believe that they can do completely new and excellent stories in the “old” timeline, with this new and awesome cast, just as well (maybe even do a better job of filling in the stories, in a way that Enterprise attempted but never did well enough, but now with regard to the characters that we care the most about! The early days of Kirk and the crew, etc. Lots of good stuff there to explore).
Hey, they can even do both: keep the new timeline for a while, then go back, etc. Hey, it’s the diehard old man mentality. I should take Spock’s advice and realize that nature abhors a vacuum….
#193 “Simple entertainment is fine; I prefer something more, and in Trek, it’s great to have well thought out science and technology as well as characters and story”
Mr. Sternbach, I see your point. I was talking about going back to a more simple and naive style. When I was young and I was watching TOS, I was never wondering about ship size, decks layout, warp coils. Back in the 60s, those details didn’t exist at all. The science was “flowing” through the story as a mistery thing. And it worked. The stories were (almost) always exciting, intelligent and smart. It was the Trek I loved. It was like watching a futuristic painting versus a neorealistic one.
Not simple. Just pure, intelligent imagination. Fantasy, yes. Is fantasy a bad thing? Does it mean “dumb”? Not at all. But this is my humble opinion.
The picture of this Enterprise looks better than the one seen in the movie. I think it’s the orange deflector dish and yellow engine lights.
#173 I disagree with you totally! Screen evidence show that it is not waaaaaaaaaaaaaay bigger infact screen evidence show that it is around 1000 feet in length. Like I said before the shuttles are about the same size as a cruise ships life boats. IMHO looking at the sceen footage we are talking around 1000 to 1200 or maybe 1400 feet in length! Look at the shot under the secondary hull when the shuttle carrying kirk and the cadets leaves That is a good reference!
Yup. It’s an ugly ship. After the Refit design in 1979, it steadily went downhill :)
SO… we all know Kirk & Crew will save the day, no matter what universe or how big the ship is…what happens when V’ger comes home? Will there be a Will Decker and Ilia onboard to make their sacrifices?
I think she’s beautiful, a nice update of an iconic image. And yes, she is bigger than the OS version. I won’t get into debates about meters or feet of a fictional ship.
This may be heresy to some of you, but I realized as I grew up how silly the original design was, as shown in the OS. Beautiful, yes. Iconic, yes. But stlll silly and impractical. The bridge of a starship would not be so small, with 8-10 crewmembers at most. Everyone, from officer to crewmember, seemed to have their own studio apartment. The engineering section was a joke, a few panels with buttons, a few large tubes for whatever, and something with a triangular structure that seemed to go on for hundreds of feet. The whole “neck” thing between the primary and secondary hulls bothered me as well. What is the reason for this narrow, unusable, waste of space? The shuttlebay seemed very small, and they only seemed to have a couple of shuttles. Voyager eliminated the neck, and Enterprise gave engineering a more realistic look, though even it was too “pretty” for me. The engineering section has always bothered me, in every film or series, as too small, too neat,too, clean, too pretty. This should be the guts of big E that generates such massive power to allow Warp Drive, not a large Audi.
I only point all of this out as a way of saying that none of this matters folks, really. That is not what made Star Trek what I still love to this day. I understand it for what it is: good storytelling. Techno-babble about fictional physics and fictional dimensions distracts from the fictional story being told. You all know this is fiction, right folks?
The new film is very entertaining storytelling. That’s enough for me as a Trek fan of 40 years.
BTW, the pic of Spock Prime made me smile. Anyone else notice the cheesy, styrofome cave set behind him? LOL! Another nod/homage (of many) to the OS?
It looked like Shatner had his cowboy hat on backwards in that video!
Details like those Mr. Sternbach and Mr. Okuda put in their books gives a deeper layer of realism or tangibility which help with the suspension of disbelief. Star Trek has never been ABOUT the ships, but seeing how they could work gives some fans (certainly myself) another level upon which to enjoy the show.
I don’t need a new tech manual to enjoy the new film, but a new tech manual would help me enjoy it more! As I understand tactile sense and set realism were edicts from JJ Abrams. Certainly as Mr. Church and the other talented individuals involved in making this new universe tried to fulfill that, they kept notes and references and checked scales and believability. I would liek to see those things published.
Also- the “argument” between techno-Trekkies is a time honored tradition in Trek, and definitely something I enjoy. People shouldn’t be rude, but there’s no reason we can’t enjoy speculation on the inner workings of New Trek. Heck- have you seen Ex-Astris-Scientia.org? It even argues with the published books!
Thank you Mr. Sternbach for your part in making Trek a fictional universe which survives scratching the surface. I hope the new one follows suit.
I watched the JJ/Shatner video, very cool. Wish I knew what they were talking about!
“Imagine the wealth of information that Starfleet was exposed to from scans of the Narada.”
Relatively little, most likely, as John W Campbell pointed out decades ago in an essay titled “No Copying Allowed”, and as Arthur C Clarke put more poetically later, unless technological progress had slowed down considerably.
“The movie has plot holes, yes. But the suspension of disbelief is strong and robust in every moment. In my opinion, this is due to good and professional filmmaking.”
Provided you define “good and professional filmmaking” as “dazzlement and distraction”. The really sad bit is that all the myriad goofinesses I noticed could have been fixed in an hour or two. But no one cared enough, so it ends up in the realm of ID4 and BATTLEFIELD EARTH.
“Damon Lindelof made clear that they are done with time travel.”
Oh, dear. Although they wouldn’t get much from scanning the Narada, the discovery that something is possible (travelling diagonally in time) and getting some idea as to the mechanism (black holes, probably quantum) will lead to R&D, especially when there’s a manifest existential threat involved. Imagine the Warren Commission discovering that Lee Harvey Oswald was from 2063 and considering it an unimportant detail.
Should have just rebooted from first principles and declared time travel off limits. Yes, CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER was a terrific episode, but would also have been a terrific episode of TIME TUNNEL.
#193 Rick- Best response ever.
Technology is inseperable from Trek. And in today’s world, it’s obviously more integrated with all forms of storytelling than ever.
We cannot go back. Unfortunately, I don’t think they’re onto this fact- yet.
#156
The stars of the film showed up at Mr. Shatner’s charity event as part of their marketing campaign.
Who know’s why he didn’t appear at the premier. Maybe because he thought the focus should be on the new stars in the film. Maybe because he had no connection with the film at all?
I hardly see the need for a slam at Mr. Shatner because he wasn’t at the premier.
#200 I totally agree! The refit connie is the best ship design in trek!
#205 – We’ve always adhered to the ideas that Gene Roddenberry spoke of at the very beginning, when he talked about how we should become comfortable with technology in the future world of Trek, and how you don’t need to explain how a six-gun works (from the westerns) but just use it. We get it. What we techy types attempted to do in TNG and beyond was to bring a -better- understanding of the concepts only barely touched upon in TOS, to make them more accessible, but without wanting to stuff paragraphs into the actors’ mouths. We get that, too. It’s very much like writing for advertising; you better know how to do it right before you start making QUICK into KWIK. We knew that with the Trek-based science and technology. We had intimate knowledge of present-day machinery and electronics and vehicles, and could extrapolate them into Trek gear and vessels. And we told both the writers and the folks who bought our tech manuals that nobody had to commit all of it to memory, though we hoped they would know to turn to the books and to us for guidance. The first part they didn’t; the second they did.
This might be a bad example, or not.. But if you think about Voyager, they were able to develop a lot of stuff on their own, such as the Delta Flyer and a (partially) working quantum slipstream drive. In ‘Endgame’ it was revealed that they would’ve gone on to develop transphasic torpedoes and ablative armor generators. The doctor alone created a neural interface which provided a whole new way of controlling/piloting a ship. All that with one crew of one ship.
There’s no telling who might’ve been onboard the Kelvin at the time it was destroyed. That crewmember who flew out the ship could’ve been someone who would’ve gone on to become an engineer who contributed to the development of the Enerprise as we knew it in the prime universe. If you think about Picard aboard the Stargazer, he was pretty much a nobody back then. If he had been killed aboard the Stargazer then who knows how much would’ve changed. He alone made a lot of difference in TNG and the TNG movies. It’d be foolish to think that nobody on the Kelvin could’ve been significant enough to change events so radically. Hell, James T. Kirk would’ve been born on the Kelvin and look how much of a difference he made, in BOTH universes. Richard Daystrom, could’ve been onboard and died. Or someone close to him, which could’ve changed his plans to continue developing duotronics. That alone could’ve changed a lot of the aesthetics, as the computer system would be totally different, and possibly less functional or advanced. Could explain the more modern looking GUI. Or the fact that the ship is bigger as it would need more people to function without such an advanced computer automating things. …And who knows! Maybe the Kelvin would’ve gone on to make important or semi-important discoveries.
Or this, or that. I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point. It’s entirely possible, without much of a stretch, for things to be as different as they are in the movie, given what happened with the Kelvin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect
#212 – What you’re doing with the bulk of your post is akin to what I talked about before. Trek is in your own mind. You’re playing with the universe, and that’s terrific.
As to the advances made by Voyager (and other recent series), if they sounded like they made sense, that was us. If they sounded like isophasogenic or trans-anything, that was the writers. :D
For those seeking a new technical manual, one would appear to be in the works. The Haynes Enterprise Manual, to be published with the blessing of Simon & Shuster, will give a definitive look at the newest starship Enterprise.
See: http://www.vfxworld.com/?sa=adv&code=3631a5a1&atype=news&id=27664
Because it is a published work and not a movie or television production, the new manual will be deemed only semi-canonical, at best. However, I speculate that eventually it might have the same influence and status as the TNG Technical Manual, written by Mr. Sternbach.
211- Well Rick, for better or for worse, my little group of friends committed a hell of a lot of it to memory. Thank you for years of technical consistency and design.
Hey, Star Trek, even before the current movie was released, was an alternate timeline….. and thank goodness for it… if we accept TOS at its historical word, we would already be a bombed-out world from the aftermath of the Eugenics War… there is no Khan, no SS Botany Bay, no Col. Green…
Voyager 6 has never launched… nor has Nomad.. no Col. Shawn Christopher of the Earth-Saturn probe space mision… and countless other events detailed in TOS that were mentioned to have occurred in the space of the time we (the audience) currently reside…
Unfortunately, we have our own demons (torture, al Kaeda, genocide in the African countries, drug lords and cartels, etc.).
For those angry that JJ has violated canon.. not so, it still exists…. from the moment the Kelvin was destroyed an alternate timeline was born. The original timeline still exists (especially if you already own all the DVDs of the past… LOL).
Just enjoy the movie and the possibilities presented for future stories!
216, it is possible that it is actually the Alternate Reality (parallel universe, etc.) depicted in the new movie that is our timeline.
Further to what you have said, because subsequent movies will be made, by definition, in the future, references can be made to the events that actually occurred in the 1990’s (with no references to Khan, Botany Bay, or Col. Green) without fear that it contradicts canon. References can be made to the events of 9/11, the election of America’s first black President, and so forth. This would make the Alternative Reality established by the events of the new move much more au courant (literally) and therefore serve to support the idea that its reality is actually ours.
#217: “it is possible that it is actually the Alternate Reality (parallel universe, etc.) depicted in the new movie that is our timeline.”
To quote a very wise man: “Fascinating!”
Thanks, 218. This would also explain why Daniels, etc., from the 31st Century in ST: Enterprise would not want to interfere with this timeline.
Breaking the “fourth wall” of fiction, let us postulate that Daniels may realize that the Prime Reality is actually reflected only a (to-his-own parallel) universe that must branch off from the Real Universe (i.e., this one). This is so because the Prime Reality is eventually actually generated through fictional means (the various TV shows, movies, etc. bearing the Star Trek name), but only if this universe — the Real Universe, a.k.a. the Alternate Reality of the new movie — is permitted to exist.
It is possible that Daniels, the Temporal Police, etc., will eventually “restore” the Prime Reality, but only after a certain significant event occurs here which is not to occur for many decades after the events depicted in the new movie.
For the Prime Reality to be created and then restored, Vulcan must die….
There is a novel in there somewhere.
Typo. I meant to write, “Breaking the “fourth wall” of fiction, let us postulate that Daniels may realize that the Prime Reality is reflected only in a (to-his-own parallel) universe that must branch off from the Real Universe (i.e., this one).”
#220 HAT RICK
“it is possible that it is actually the Alternate Reality (parallel universe, etc.) depicted in the new movie that is our timeline.
Further to what you have said, because subsequent movies will be made, by definition, in the future, references can be made to the events that actually occurred in the 1990’s (with no references to Khan, Botany Bay, or Col. Green) without fear that it contradicts canon. References can be made to the events of 9/11, the election of America’s first black President, and so forth. This would make the Alternative Reality established by the events of the new move much more au courant (literally) and therefore serve to support the idea that its reality is actually ours.”
I would disagree. Everything in the Trek universe still exists as it was up until Nero’s attack on the Kelvin.
Kahn is still floating out their in his ship. World War Three still happened. The TNG crew still came back in time to save First Contact etc etc.
#214 – That’s interesting; will be looking forward to seeing it. I suspect that it’s a collaborative deal because Simon & Schuster can’t afford to do it on their own. They’d been whining over the last 5-6 years that “the market isn’t what it used to be,” which is probably true, but they never did a lot to promote products either. Classic author vs. publisher thing. Ah well, mark your calendars.
I’ll be looking forward to the new technical manual as well, Mr. Sternbach. It will be nonstop hours of reading on the day I buy it!
I looked and didn’t see a use for the barcode scanners. My brother asked me “what do those upc scanners do”
Anyone?
#132
I know this is fiction, but some of the points I’ve made are about as contrived as a really bad slasher film. This is the creative team behind the series “Lost” which is the most incredible plot-storyline-continuity effort there’s ever been, especially considering it has spanned 4 seasons. I’m disappointed because this brilliant group of talent couldn’t be more imaginative with their plot points in roughly 2 hours with well-known establisged characters–and believe me–I’m not a fan with an obsession for canon. Kirk’s portrayal as a delinquent who has to have his own way is the equvalent of Annikan Skywalker’s spoiled rotten brat. I don’t care what kind of timeline tampering you have it just doesn’t ring true. Now unless there was a large amount of exposition left on the cutting room floor, ther’s some holes in the script you could drive the Enterprise through. I wanted this to be the greatest movie of all time & it wasn’t. In fact, despite all the money & talent, it’s not even the best Trek film. However, like many of you–and Spiderman 3 is a good example–dood Star Trek is not as good as great Star Trek, but it’s better than no Trek at all.
#194—-Actually, I was referencing “Yesteryear”, an episode of TAS written by Dorothy Fontana and generally considered canon.
“Relatively little, most likely, as John W Campbell pointed out decades ago in an essay titled “No Copying Allowed”, and as Arthur C Clarke put more poetically later, unless technological progress had slowed down considerably.”
I’m not sure how that would preclude Starfleet from making use of the recorded telemetry from the Narada (no doubt brought aboard one of the shuttles by one of the 800 survivors from the USS Kelvin) and the debris salvaged from the area of the attack over the next two decades.
“Imagine the Warren Commission discovering that Lee Harvey Oswald was from 2063 and considering it an unimportant detail.”
Who says that Starfleet would consider any of the details of these events to be unimportant?
What I said was that one of the writers of the sequel has made clear that they won’t be telling another story involving time travel. That is not the same thing as suggesting that Starfleet is going to pretend it did not happen or ignore the potential scientific ramifications of these events.
Suggestion: reading comprehension.
Try reading the post to which the response was made. That may help you to view the statement in its appropriate context.
#224 Barcode scanners- They’re there to give us something to laugh at!
Remember- it’s all about entertainment.
224, True. They are pretty funny!
My reading comprehension’s fine, thanks.
Imagine Nero destroying the Earth first, and O/K still declaring “no, we’re done with time travel even though it’s possible”. It’s manifestly ludicrous, but no more so except to the audience; the characters won’t see it that way.
As to those other debatably rollback-worthy events — they are indeed debate-worthy. So long as it’s a known option, it must be considered. To ignore it is a defect, perhaps forgivable but a defect nonetheless. (TOS, of course, had more or less deliberately random stardates, meaning one can never be entirely sure that the time-travel episodes didn’t happen after all the others, and the consequences never known. ASSIGNMENT: EARTH might well have been the last episode…)
To paraphrase Douglas Adams, “Time travel: loathe it or like it, you can’t ignore it.” Hence the desirability of doing a clean reboot with time travel declared off-limits from start.
But of course they can always count on the fans to patch things for them. I myself just figured out a credible way for those post-apocalyptic cavemen in BATTLEFIELD EARTH to fly thousand-year-old Harriers, and I didn’t even like that movie…
I think It was very good over all. But I do agree with 127 on a few points…especially with Kirk’s character….Its a little unreasonable …one minute hes some bar brawling punk…the next hes sitting in the captains chair…ridiculous. Also, Would like to have seen some connection with Nero to the new nacelle design. Furthermore, why the heck would they SEND 200 YEAR OLD SPOCK BY HIMSELF TO SAVE ROMULUS (and presumably Remus though not mentioned). Finally, I hope they realize that their little trick they used to get around Trek Doctrine (ie the ‘Prime’ universe) does not affect what happened in Enterprise. Also messy is how it works with the paradox of past excursions into the past…This aint Star Wars…these things have to be explained….carefully to the physicists and engineers that make up the ST fan base!
I disagree with 127 about Spock, Kirk and Scotty all being together…I think the script made clear (especially through Spock Prime) that *Fate was afoot.(though Im a little worried about putting a concept like fate in ST unsupported with logic…but I think It was done right)