Video and Pix Of Paramount Rose Parade Float With USS Enterprise | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Video and Pix Of Paramount Rose Parade Float With USS Enterprise January 2, 2012

by John Tenuto , Filed under: CBS/Paramount,Conventions/Events/Attractions,Star Trek (2009 film),Viral Video/Mashup/Images , trackback

As reported earlier, Paramount Pictures had their first float today as part of the Pasadena Tournament of Roses Parade. Celebrating their centennial, the studio’s float featured some icons from Paramount films, including the USS Enterprise soaring over the Paramount mountain and gate. See video and images of the float below.

 

Star Trek Part of Paramount’s Rose Parade Float

Paramount Pictures featured the U.S.S Enterprise from Star Trek amongst other Paramount Pictures icons such as the Grease car and Transformers Bumblebee at the 123rd Tournament of Roses Parade. The “100 Years of Movie Magic” float included the Star Trek 2009 version of the U.S.S. Enterprise. (As a note of correction to our earlier article, TrekMovie was originally told by Paramount the float would include the original series ship design). The float also featured a person dressed as Mr. Spock waving to crowd with a Vulcan salute!

UPDATE: Video from NBC coverage (Al Roker does brief Kirk impression, saying "Bones!")

Check out video of the float from Hallmark Channel.

The float is 55 feet long and 26 feet tall, and the Enterprise was decorated with rice, silver leaf protea, and black seaweed and it included blinking lights. The makers of the float also released images of the build in progress on Flickr.

Rose Parade Paramount Float-10

As a “six degrees of Star Trek” trivia note, the Paramount float also features the plane from Wings, the 1927 film that was the first to win the Academy Award for Best Picture. It was direct by William Wellman. Wellman’s son, William Wellman Jr. has appeared as a Bajoran on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine’s episode “Favor the Bold” and played Charlie Evans in the Tim Russ directed fan film Star Trek: Of Gods and Men.

Congratulations to Paramount Pictures on both its 100 Anniversary and its Tournament of Roses float.

Seattle celebrates new year with some Star Trek

In other Star Trek/New Year news, the celebration at the Seattle Space Needle included some music from Star Trek. Watch the festivities…

 

Comments

1. Odkin - January 2, 2012

NOOOOO!!!

It’s the Faker-prise!

2. Oddness - January 2, 2012

Oh they went with the 2009 movie version. The original concepts looked like the classic TV ship I thought…. Anyhoo still cool looking.

3. SebiMeyer - January 2, 2012

Nice.

But why is the Enterprise strafe-bombing Hollywood?

4. snoopytrek - January 2, 2012

i agree..you’d think with six movies with the refurbed and E-A, that would have been the one to use!

5. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 2, 2012

At least there were no flames coming of the Warp engines. I saw that there were blinking running light too on the Primary Hull. Nice touch!

6. PEB - January 2, 2012

and NuTrek bashing will begin in 3…2…1…oh wait, it’s already happening. should i even be surprised anymore?

7. MikeTen - January 2, 2012

Not trying to be a smart a$$, but the float Enterprise actually looks better than the movie Enterprise. I think the nacelles look smaller and seem more in proportion to the rest of the ship.

Would have like to have seen the classic TOS ship on the float, it did start it all.

8. PEB - January 2, 2012

i always thought the opening theme from first contact and ‘enterprising young men’ from 09 are two of trek’s best pieces of music for a good fireworks show. jmo.
and seriously though, i love all you guys and your comments. even the ones that get under my skin. we wouldnt be trek fans if we all agreed on everything.

9. Phil - January 2, 2012

@ 6. Nope, you should know better.

Again, nice job, Paramount. Don’t forget, So Cal residents all the floats will be on display for a few days before the head off to the shredder….

10. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 2, 2012

Hey. The Big E looked good for a float. Paramount did a good Job.
But. I dopn’t think this is canon. Lol. Ok I said it. I kids because i loves.

11. Anthony Pascale - January 2, 2012

sorry for the misdirection last week regarding the TOS enterprise. That is what Paramount told us so that is what we reported. I think the PR person I talked to just didnt know or maybe the float builders decided on their own. THe original sketch looked like the TOS enterprise so maybe it was last minute decision to go with all movie stuff.

Anyway I think it looks pretty good.

Thanks John for the article

12. Craiger - January 2, 2012

The announcers didn’t even discuss Trek and the Enterprise.

13. Holly - January 2, 2012

@Anthony: It was decided after the concept rendering to do the ’09 version for commercial purposes. Also, the Enterprise was covered in rice, poppy seeds, and red pepper tree berries, not seaweed or silver leaf, although those items were on other areas of the float (like the bars holding up the fireworks and the car). I have many photos of it during the decoration process as I was there to help out. =)

14. Paul Walker - January 2, 2012

I watched the coverage on the HGTV network and their commentators did mention Star Trek as part of their description of the Paramount float as it went by. Not sure about any other networks who covered the parade.

15. Dee - lvs moon' surface - January 2, 2012

OK… looks good……… :-) :-)

16. Christopher Roberts - January 2, 2012

12. You mean they were treating Trek like it was “the elephant in the room”? ;)

17. Jonboc - January 2, 2012

Nice work on the Enterprise, looks great hovering over the crowd. Awesome float…would love to attend one of those parades in person.

18. Craiger - January 2, 2012

#14 I guess I should have thought about that and that other networks would have mentioned Trek and the Enterprise. Allthough I am not sure why multiple networks had to cover the same event?

19. Of Bajor - January 2, 2012

NuTrek is Paramount’s baby. No way they were ever gonna use anything other than the JJPrise.

Looks cool to me

20. Craiger - January 2, 2012

I guess if Paramount does a new TV series that will be set in the new Universe and nothing in the old Universe anymore since the float has the new Enterprise?

21. Sheldon Cooper - January 2, 2012

Very pretty! Despite the occasional naysayers, Paramount knows that they have a cash cow in Star Trek and have invested a lot into our favorite sci-fi show over the years. Featuring the Enterprise as the penultimate sculpture on their signature float is a nice acknowledgment of Trek’s importance to the company. Let’s face it – if there was no $$ Trek, it would have died long ago and we’d all be grousing about “Babylon 5″ instead.

22. Driver - January 2, 2012

The announcer spent too much time talking about his connection with Bumblebee. No time left for poor Enterprise.

23. maffc - January 2, 2012

@20

IIRC Paramount no longer own the rights to Star Trek on TV. I believe when Viacom split the Movie rights were retained by Paramount Pictures and the TV right went to CBS corporation (via Paramount Television).

I know both Nu-Viacom and CBS are both owned by National Amusements but aren’t they run as independant companies?
Could CBS produce a Star Trek Series without any permission, input or reference to anything from Paramount? If so then the would have a free hand on what was made

anyone know?

24. lostrod - January 2, 2012

Yea, I understand why they went with the alternate universe Enterprise. This is all part of the marketing plan.

Would have been interesting if they had done one half TOS and the other ’09 Enterprise …

Regards.

25. Alex Prewitt - January 2, 2012

JJ Prise. Blechchh.

26. Craiger - January 2, 2012

#23 Sorry I forgot about CBS owning Trek TV. However if they see how well the reboot went I doubt they would want to go back to the old Trek Universe. I still think that confuses people and Paramount should own both Trek TV and the Trek Movies.

27. tom vinelli - January 2, 2012

Youtube has the worse video player ever, It plays back faster then it loads , come on youtube don’t be aso dam cheap

28. jas_montreal - January 2, 2012

the enterprise looks soo ugly here. Those necelles are too big, lol.

29. Nony - January 2, 2012

Awesomesauce. Enterprise looks great! I’m pleased they included Star Trek.

30. Bugs Nixon - January 2, 2012

What has happened?

20+ years ago people would have accepted these simple asthetic changes. Now however, its an unfaithful abomination, its a case of ‘destroying ones childhood’ etc…

I think the internet has something to do with it. People have changed. Why?

No really, what happened?

31. sean - January 2, 2012

#30

People were just as bitchy then, it’s just that you didn’t have to hear them.

32. La Violetta - January 2, 2012

The internet proved that negative opinions sell. It’s an environment that encourages and rewards conflict and controversy, and then when you add in a property as derisive as Star Trek… well, guess what’ll happen. I wonder often what happened to the fans that were around when the powers unveiled an industrial-deco starship revamp or a brand new, front-heavy tree-fungus of a ship.

Personally, I like the new ship. It’s exciting. ;)

33. AJ - January 2, 2012

THIS IS A DISASTER!

JJ Abrams has shown the model which will be in the next film!

As they say, any PR is good PR.

I guess.

34. Jack - January 2, 2012

31. Yep, we can be jerky contrarians (like the guys from the muppet show, but without actually being seen) who think everybody should read our opinions. And I”m just talking about myself.

And, I think having the ear of Bob Orci and others involved in Trek elevates our self-importance.

I’m looking forward to the new ship growing on me. My only real complaint was that I would have liked to see a) more of her, period… and b) a few more (more TOS-Style and not TNG’s Love Boat look) windows on the outside, to get a real sense of her size. And the big light panels going around the nacelles looked decorative and not-so functional… I guess I just want to be convinced that this could be an actual ship and not just a model (It looked pretty modelly to me in a few of the shots) — because, since I was 9, I’ve wanted all this to be real.

But we all have preferences. We’ve never seen a movie-quality TOS enterprise, and seeing an updated but relatively faithful version (that also looked more like it could actually be a real-world Starship, as much as anything could) would have been pretty amazing. But whatever, it didn”t happen.

And sometimes I wonder if we sort of think: “Duh, doesn”t JJ know that the Enterprise deflector dish wasn’t blue, or lit up, until…” and, yeah, of course he does, but he wanted his blue.

Hey, that whole TMP idea of having the deflector blue at certain speeds and golden at others… well, that was entirely abandoned after TMP (except for reused footage in Trek II), wasn”t it? I always wondered if that explanation was a retcon, because in the movie, it just looked like they”d changed the colour at one point but hadn”t corrected it in earlier scenes.

Heck, I was mildly annoyed, for 30 seconds, that they made the Enterprise-E’s deflector yellow — “I know engineers, they love to change things”). But it quickly grew on me.

P.S. Was watching Empire on TV last night. And the level of filmmaking craftsmanship, art direction and attention to detail is astounding. The sets disappear and you really do get immersed in another world. Lucas and Spielberg changed the way films were made (compare the Amityville Horror to Poltergeist, two years later [or Poltergeist to its terrible sequels, which look, mostly, like they were made 10 years before the first one]). if JJ can do that with Star Trek, heck, let him.

Discussion of things that might have worked better is fine on here, don’t you think?, as long as we don’t get into name-calling/ inventing the filmmaker’s motives…

I wasn’t a big fan of the FX for San Francisco, for example (too brutalist and menacing) or even the city on Vulcan, because of my Polyanna visions of an eco-friendly future of beautiful design that works with the surroundings. Same with giant factory farms that can be seen for hundreds of miles. And I get how the filmmakers, I”m guessing, wanted it to look grounded in real-world needs (finding somewhere for all those people), 60s architecture and a grittier, more industrial feel. But it fit the movie, I guess.

35. Khan was Framed! - January 2, 2012

The big question is does anyone care?

No.

I doubt Rosebowl fans (whatever that is) even know that there are different versions of the Enterprise. Sports fans (I’m assuming) aren’t exactly aware of such details.

Do Trekkies care that Paramount used the “Ugly-prize”?

No. Not really.

That ship has already sailed; Abrams & co. ruined the ship in 2009, it’s been 3 years & still isn’t getting any prettier. We’re over it.

So, someone reported that it would be the real enterprise instead of this debacle. What else is new?

We’re Trekkies, we’re used to being lied to & having our dreams crushed in front of us.

36. Let Them Eat Plomeek Soup - January 2, 2012

They didn’t show the TOS Enterprise, and they didn’t make the Transformer look like the toy or how it looked in the anime . So everything’s fair. Yes?

Either way, loved the float.

37. Buzz Cagney - January 2, 2012

Great to see Trek getting such a prominent position. Most people won’t know what movie the model came from but they will know its the Enterprise, and thats the important thing.
Not a bad recreation at all. Good work.

38. Jonboc - January 2, 2012

#35 “We’re Trekkies, we’re used to being lied to & having our dreams crushed in front of us.”

no….YOU are used to having YOUR dreams crushed right before your eyes. Mine remain quite intact, thank you very much. :)

39. Michael Hall - January 2, 2012

“I think the internet has something to do with it. People have changed. Why?

Fair question. As someone who’s been around for awhile, and speaking just for myself, I can only say that J.J. Abrams and Ryan Church had every bit as much opportunity to win me over with their version of the Enterprise as Andy Probert and Doug Trumbull did with theirs. The difference–again, speaking strictly for myself–was that the TMP redesign was classy and stylish, yet believable, while the Abrams take is a malproportioned, industrial monstrosity. TOS “purists” were not bitching in 1979 because they were largely pleased with The Motion Picture version of the ship–more so, as it turned out, than with the film itself.

40. Drij - January 2, 2012

Still hate the new Enterprise.

41. Capt. of the U.S.S. Anduril - January 2, 2012

#3 The Enterprise is strafing Hollywood cause Hollywood deserves a couple dozen photon torpedoes.

42. Daniel Shock - January 2, 2012

30 – Complaining about complainers always bugs me. If you paid someone to redecorate your house, and you didn’t like it… would you just accept it?

I really liked the 09 movie…but I don’t like the new enterprise… or the sets making up her interior. My opinion. Certainly. But, there is zero point to a message board like this if it’s only for fawning enthusiasm.

43. Kev-1 - January 2, 2012

41- Yes. I preferred the more thoughtful Star Trek, but if somebody liked or disliked ST2009, that’s OK, too.

44. T'Cal - January 2, 2012

Here’s a pic of the Big E from the Festival of Lights in East Peoria, IL:
http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t314/tcal047/EPFoLEnt.jpg

45. Jeyl - January 2, 2012

Hey, I’m glad that the JJ Enterprise was selected to be on that float. The other Enterprises can now retain their dignity by not sharing a float with the Transformers movies. That will always be a plus in my book.

46. Adam Cohen - January 2, 2012

While I don’t like the design of the new ship, I admit that Michael Giacchino,s heroic score plays in my head whenever I see this version of the Enterprise. The more I watch the 2009 film, I grow more impressed by the score. The movie takes flight thanks in large part to Mr. Giacchino.

47. Michael Hall - January 2, 2012

@ #44–

Beauty! Now that’s a ship!

48. CarlG - January 2, 2012

@30: Absolutely it’s the internet. When everyone has a voice, everyone thinks they need to scream to grab your attention.

49. Chain of Command - January 2, 2012

#45 LOL

That new Enterprise…..still not sure about it. It’s got too many weird proportions.

50. VZX - January 2, 2012

Cool! Bummer the commentators didn’t even acknowledge the Enterprise or Star Trek, but whatevs. The old girl looks awesome regardless. Go Star Trek!

51. Red Dead Ryan - January 2, 2012

The complainers who hate the design of the J.J Abrams Enterprise are obviously under the delusion that their whining will result in a new design, when in fact, the sequel will most likely retain the same look, with maybe a few very minor detail changes at the most.

What we saw in ’09 is what we will be seeing in the sequel. J.J Abrams liked the design because it adheres to his vision, and he isn’t going to let a bunch of shit-pantsed nerds dictate what his ship should look like.

Get used to it, and stop your bitching.

52. Drij - January 2, 2012

46 –

The score in the new movie sucked as well. It fails in comparison to every other movie.

53. CarlG - January 2, 2012

@52: Ahahahahahahah! You kidder, you.

Oh wait, you’re serious. My condolences, have you been tone-deaf for very long?

54. CarlG - January 2, 2012

@51: But duuuuude! It’s THE INTERNET. It’s like, 75-80% bitching by volume! ;)

55. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - January 2, 2012

I don’t like the engine design but I love the bridge

56. Jeff - January 2, 2012

The Big E snubbed in the commentary for a lousy transformer.

57. Nano - January 2, 2012

Big E in the Rose Parade and my Cylon Duckies winning the game!!! Nice beginning for 2012

58. gumtuu - January 2, 2012

@51. Telling someone to NOT dislike something because you want them to like it?

Someone has delusions of grandeur indeed.

Some (me included) will CONTINUE to dislike the new Enterprise no matter how much you tell them not to. That will NOT CHANGE. To quote you,

“Get used to it, and stop your bitching.”

59. gumtuu - January 2, 2012

Disliking the new Enterprise design has NOTHING to do with trying to get them to change it. It’s an aesthetic reaction, not a crusade.

If they do twelve movies and the ship stays exactly the same, it will still not make me like it more just because it is unchanged. It will still be an ugly ship.

60. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 2, 2012

Hey, stop dissing on Bumblebee, my nine year old daughter’s favourite Transformer! Like the float was just about and for you guys…Sheesh.

61. Red Dead Ryan - January 2, 2012

#58.

“Telling someone to NOT dislike something because you want them to like it?”

Dude, that isn’t what I wrote in my post. I didn’t even imply it. I was saying how you folks who don’t like the new design should stop bitching about it because we are going to be stuck with it for the sequel and maybe even beyond whether we like it or not.

“Some (me included) will CONTINUE to dislike the new Enterprise no matter how much you tell them not to. That will NOT CHANGE.”

You can continue to dislike the new Enterprise all you want, it won’t change ONE IOTA. What I don’t like is how you guys continue to bitch about things from a movie that came out almost three years ago. There’s no use in rehashing your complaints over and over, ad nauseaum. At least when it comes to superficial qualms, like the design of the ship.

Because J.J. Abrams isn’t going to listen to you, me, or anybody else except for the writers. But even then he holds veto power. He’s doing things as how HE sees them. How HE wants it all to be.

Heck, I still don’t like the brewery being used as Engineering. But guess what? J.J Abrams likes it and nothing’s going to persuade him otherwise. It looks like we’re going to see the brewery again in the sequel. I’d rather see an engine room that looks more like an engine room on a starship, but I’m not going to lose any sleep over it if J.J decides to stick with the brewery. Because my opinion doesn’t matter. It will never matter. Nothing I can say or do will change that.

Time to move on.

62. Red Dead Ryan - January 2, 2012

#60.

Fair enough.

63. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 2, 2012

I have also said that to people. Either you like something or you don’t. It doesn’t make sense to keep repeating all the negative reactions you had/have all the time, especially after two and a half years. What’s done is done.

Maybe JJ Abrams will make changes to the design of the Enterprise and/or engineering – I was going to automatically type “brewery” here…:) – as per someone’s CONSTRUCTIVE suggestions, or he won’t. We won’t know for certain until 17 May 2013.

However, constantly bitching and generally making rude and nasty comments about someone’s creative efforts or other people’s liking of something you don’t, ie Transformers, does not ingratiate you to anyone, least of all I think to the people you most want to impress with your alternative ideas. I guess there are some people around who think they are being clever in really what can only be described as trolling.

64. Phil - January 2, 2012

Man, this is pathetic. Did you all miss the Donate Life float? The stories of all the people touched by organ donations? In general, people were happy and welcoming in the new year, wishing each other well. Trek, as a few of you have pointed out, is supposed to represent something better in all of us, but all you can seem to do is scream at each other about artistic interpetation. So may good causes were represented today, hopefully they can continue their work and this exposure helps them. What was the theme of this years parade? Just Imagine………

65. Gary Neumann - January 2, 2012

Very nice float and they OBVIOUSLY were going to use the NEW enterprise or the refit. Those are the most recognizable enterprises for the public. Swear and moan as you want, you know that I’m right and the discussion is over.

66. David G. - January 2, 2012

Just really odd that a “100th anniversary” float is primarily composed of two items from a couple of movies from just the past couple of years. Plus the car from “Grease” from less than 35 years ago. Then there’s the token biplane from “Wings” to represent the first 65 years of the studio’s first hundred years.

The TV announcer on another channel claimed the float also had Forrest Gump (again, a movie only about 20 years old) sitting on his bench, but I never saw it.

67. claypool2011 - January 3, 2012

I don’t hate the new design, but since the next movie has been so delayed, and the apparent Paramount position is “no new trek on TV until the movies are done” I’ll start watching trek again after the movies are done and we have new TV.

2 hours or so every 5-6 years isn’t sufficient, and I’ve decided not to support it.

68. Greenberg - January 3, 2012

Hmmm, I checked the photos and I couldn’t see the Enterprise. I did see some melted white plastic that sort of looked like what the Enterprise MIGHT resemble if it’d been built by Helen Keller and Anne Frank working in tandem, but nope – no Enterprise here.

69. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 3, 2012

#67 If the movies don’t get much in the way of “support”, then I doubt there will ever be another Star Trek television series.

Anyway, @ Bob Orci, if you are back and reading –
The DVD of Cowboys & Aliens has just been released here. We hired it the other night and watched it. It’s curious because the more I watched the more it grew on me, as in liked it. My 16 year old son gives Cowboys & Aliens a big thumbs up. The reviewer for DVD releases in the TV Guide here gave it 4 out of 5 stars. My only problem was that I wish that the Daniel Craig character, Jake, was a little less grumpy and serious, although he had every reason to be as pissed off as he was…just saying though.

Just thought you, Bob, would like to know…

70. CmdrR - January 3, 2012

3 – But why is the Enterprise strafe-bombing Hollywood?

Have you stepped inside a theatre lately???

71. Jim Nightshade - January 3, 2012

HAHA I liked seeing the Enterprise on a rose parade float! First thing I thought was oh no all the JJ haters are gonna be mad thats its not the classic E hahah oh well….As others have mentioned it proves Trek is one of the FEW franchises Paramount has had a long time that still brings in money thanks to us fans and more lately even broader general audience popularity…

I also noticed the camera zoomed in on the enterprise and at that point I am sure the anchors were supposed to say somthin bout Trek but they totally missed it…sigh…no respect….

72. Jeyl - January 3, 2012

“You can continue to dislike the new Enterprise all you want, it won’t change ONE IOTA. What I don’t like is how you guys continue to bitch about things from a movie that came out almost three years ago.”

Why does it matter if someone still has an opinion on a design that’s three years old or even 50? This isn’t some opinion regarding a real design flaw on a plane that was later fixed which would warrant a “move on” attitude. This is about one of the most iconic star ships in the entertainment history. Why shouldn’t we still be vocal about the design when it keeps popping up in new ways? You may think it’s low for people complaining about a design three years after the fact, but I think complaining about people complaining is even lower. They’re not stupid and they know that there’s a near zero percent chance that their opinions will be considered. That shouldn’t stop them regardless.

“Because my opinion doesn’t matter. It will never matter. Nothing I can say or do will change that.”

Hey Ryan, remember when the original Star Trek series got remastered for HD? The first CGI model of the Enterprise that was used for the first round of episodes was a disaster. When word got out that everyone was extremely underwhelmed with the design, they went back and changed A TON of details for future episodes. The results were pretty outstanding. Granted I still prefer the classic model shots over the new CGI ones, I still commend the artists for listening to the vocal crowd because in the end, it DID make the CGI Enterprise look a lot better.

So don’t say your opinion or anyone else’s opinion doesn’t matter when it has in the past. It might not change things for the new Trek movie, but that shouldn’t be a reason why we can’t stay vocal about it.

73. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 3, 2012

35. Khan was Framed!

Can’t they just change it so that we like it? It obvious that many here are perturbed by the design. Mostly that it just out of proportion. It should not be difficult to revise with 3D graphics and all.

Kust how did they fugly it up so bad? Even “The Cage” had it mostly righr from the start!

74. jamesingeneva - January 3, 2012

Can’t believe nobody is complaining that they didn’t mention the Enterprise in the float description, I thought that was sort of a dis. Oh well…

75. Hat Rick - January 3, 2012

I disliked the KTLA television coverage of the float, which did not mention the Enterprise, as far as I could tell.

76. Calastir - January 3, 2012

Not even a quick mention of the Enterprise by the commentators, but a lot of comment on that crappy bumblebee thing in front of it. Why am I not surprised though?

77. El Chup - January 3, 2012

Wrong font

78. VZX - January 3, 2012

@69:

Cowboys & Aliens suffered from some weird pacing. It threw off a lot of people. Other than that, it was a solid movie.

BTW: I love the new Enterprise design. But I don’t mind people complaining about it. That is what a comment section is for, isn’t it?

79. TrekkerChick - January 3, 2012

“Just really odd that a “100th anniversary” float is primarily composed of two items from a couple of movies from just the past couple of years. Plus the car from “Grease” from less than 35 years ago.”

I’m guessing that many people watching wouldn’t even recognize characters or scenes of Paramount productions from much before that, e.g. Hope/Crosby/Lamour (the “Road” pictures from the 40s) or the hissy that some might have from, say, a scene from The 10 Commandments, from the 50s), or the Marx Brothers (from the 30s), (to name three), not to mention the inter-studio horse-trading in marketing rights to movies filmed in the past.

80. TrekkerChick - January 3, 2012

Besides “Trek” fans, not many are going to know the difference between the “JJPrise” and and a TOS Star Trek NCC-1701. And, we’re not THAT far away (**shudder**) from the 50th anniversary of Star Trek.

81. Thorny - January 3, 2012

The Abrams-verse Enterprise isn’t my favorite starship design, but I don’t hate it. It is a middle of the pack design, in my book, along with Picard’s Enterprise (which also looks very top heavy). I don’t expect any design changes for Trek 2013, but I do hope someone reminds the CGI artists that the NAME of the ship should be on the stern, not the registry number.

82. Horatio - January 3, 2012

The Hallmark Channel commentators didn’t even mention Trek. Duh. HGTV on thier coverage, however did.

83. rebecca - January 3, 2012

The Enterprise on the float was beautiful. And it’s my fave starship design. JJ Abrams did a great job with the movie in 2009 and I can’t wait to see Star Trek 12 in May 2013. The name of the ship should be on the stern.

84. rebecca - January 3, 2012

#59. i don’t think JJ Abrams’ Enterprise was ugly, both on the outside and inside, I thought it was beautifully constructed.

85. rebecca - January 3, 2012

I loved the bridge and captain’s chair

86. Adolescent Nightmare - January 3, 2012

Do you think people will give up on whining after the villain is announced? It seems like they would have to accept that whining is futile at that point. But you are right, it is the internet and maybe whining is permanent.

87. cmwhite001 - January 3, 2012

@12 It all depend on the chanel you where watching. RFD-TV talk about it.

88. Spock/Uhura Fan - January 3, 2012

@#84 rebecca

So did I. I liked the the way the whole ship looked, inside and out, save for agreeing with the fact that the engine room did look like the brewery that it was. I’m not complaining, though. The bridge, transporter room, halls, etc., looked great. I think it all fits an updated Trek.

89. Buzz Cagney - January 3, 2012

#72 Individually you are probably correct but I think enough people complained about the Brewery that they will have to listen. I fully expect to see a more traditional Trek engineering section next time out.
In fact hasn’t that already been hinted at by one of the team? Sorry, can’t remember who.

90. Mike;_B - January 3, 2012

Gotta keep the people with ADHD and the “boat jumping” crowds that just LOVE action popcorn flicks that do not mind the design, and have NO idea of the main idea behind Star Trek is.

91. William Kirk - January 3, 2012

JJ-Prise… Sad…

92. Andrew - January 3, 2012

For people complaining that the commentators didn’t mention the Enterprise, there were other networks covering the parade that did like NBC and HGTV. There were even fireworks going off that weren’t mentioned in the video above that made the HGTV broadcasters say that they hoped the Enterprise had its shields up! So at least the national broadcasts gave the Enterprise some respect. Maybe there’s other video of their broadcasts online.

93. DeShonn Steinblatt - January 3, 2012

90. Don’t forget the people who can’t string together a coherent sentence.

94. Hat Rick - January 3, 2012

It’s great that some non-KTLA commentators had their act together and mentioned the Enterprise. It was right at the very top of the float and Bob Eubanks and Stephanie Edwards didn’t see fit to mention it. It’s like describing the major tourist attractions in New York City and forgetting to mention the Empire State Building or Times Square.

Star Trek has made billions for Paramount. It doesn’t rate a brief mention on a Paramount float where its eponymous starship is the most prominent feature?

I mean, you could SEE the thing from a mile away!

Were the KTLA guys blind? Come on! Get with the program!

As a Trek fan, I am offended.

Up to now, KTLA has always been my favorite station for Rose Parade coverage.

Not any more. Not any more, I say!

Also, this year’s Rose Parade was below par anyway, except for the Paramount float, which I really liked because of the Star Trek connection, and a few others. And I hated the fact that it wasn’t even held on New Year’s Day, because of the fact that it was a Sunday. It felt screwy.

95. Cervantes - January 4, 2012

The float turned out great overall. The fugly J.J. prise remains fugly. The announcer obviously wasn’t a big ‘Trek’ fan. Ho hum.

96. Hat Rick - January 5, 2012

Here in LA-LA land, one thing I haven’t read about this year’s Rose Parade is that it was great, spectacular, or the best ever. Not even on KTLA.

Of course, that’ could be because I’ve personally boycotted watching KTLA since their defective description of the Paramount float.

One reason for said lack of effusive praise, I would think, is because the announcers at KTLA fouled it up so badly when it came to the Enterprise.

… Bitter? No, why would you ask? I’m not bitter at all. Not one bit….

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