A Closer Look At The New USS Enterprise From Star Trek Into Darkness – Notice Something Different? | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

A Closer Look At The New USS Enterprise From Star Trek Into Darkness – Notice Something Different? May 19, 2013

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Spoilers,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

TrekMovie continues our deep dive of analysis into Star Trek Into Darkness. Today we bring you a closer look at the USS Enterprise from the movie, including a surprising details you may have missed. We also have some exclusive insider details. Check it out below (beware of spoilers).


Enterprise gets refit in Star Trek Into Darkness

In Star Trek Into Darkness the USS takes some serious damage. They even played up this notion in the marketing often showing a ship crashing into the ocean and the Enterprise falling toward Earth was featured on the posters for the movie.

Domestic poster featuring falling Enterprise

But if you have seen the movie you know that in the end the ship makes it through (it was the USS Vengeance that takes a dive into San Francisco Bay). But the USS Enterprise is certainly not spaceworthy after the battle above Earth. The final scene of the movie jumps forward almost a year after that battle with a ceremony to ‘re-christen’ the USS Enterprise. We then see the crew on the bridge as they set off on their new five-year mission and then the ship warps away. While the bridge itself appeared to be exactly the same, if you looked closely the ship’s exterior you would spot differences. Just compare the images below (taken from one of the movie trailers and from a behind-the-scenes video about the music)

USS Enterprise in “Star Trek Into Darkness” (right before encountering USS Vengeance)

“refit” USS Enterprise from end of “Star Trek Into Darkness”

A source confirms with TrekMovie that ILM did make changes to the digital model of the Enterprise in order to show it has been ‘refit.’ According to the source there are “big and subtle changes” to the ship. The most obvious difference is the now much wider impulse engines. While the nacelles do appear different in the above image that is mostly due to distorted angle of the pre-warp-effect. However, the source did say there are some small changes to the nacelles as well. The following video gives you a better look at the refit.

The original ‘refit’

While there are differences for the new universe Enterprise ‘refit,’ they are not nearly as pronounced as the original ‘refit’ Enterprise from Star Trek: The Motion Picture. In that case the ship had gone through a complete redesign to transition from the 60s TV series to the big-budget 1979 film.

Original TV series USS Enterprise and ‘refit’ from movie era

Obviously we will see more of the new refit when the Blu-ray comes out and of course we will have to wait for the next movie to see the refit completely, and find out if the ship has any new technologies or features.


1. meepmeep189 - May 19, 2013

Cue the fan rage :P First?

2. Art Vandelay - May 20, 2013

Sweet! I can’t wait for some orthographic views of this refit. Maybe some aftermarket parts for the revell model… :) Thanks!

3. Josh C. - May 20, 2013

Is it me or are the rear of the nacells more raised on the refit? In the first shot you can see the “ring” of lighting further up on the nacell but it doesn’t look like you can after the refit

4. sisko - May 20, 2013

Still doesn’t look good.

Original Connie and Connie Refit for the win!

5. Brandon - May 20, 2013

I wish they would do a Hayne’s Book covering just this version of Enterprise.

6. Mantastic - May 20, 2013

It doesn’t look all that different to me aside from the impulse engines. I also remember the phaser banks being recessed inside of having the bulbs a la the original Constitution refit.

7. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 20, 2013

I like the look of the Enterprise and its ample, juicy nacelles in the picture just before the USS Vengeance does its dirty. The later refit does not look quite as attractive…

8. Chris - May 20, 2013

I notice the strip that’s behind the bridge and leading to the impulse engine is different. It looks narrower and more elevated

9. Marvin the Martian - May 20, 2013

What I see is more weighty and slightly lofted coalescing into a soft yet defined tip.

Oops, sorry. My girlfriend’s boobs were blocking the photos.

10. Melllvar - May 20, 2013

I dunno man, one of the aspects of the jj-prise that I really liked was how similar it looked from behind to TOS / TMP Enterprise… but now they’ve taken away that familiar impulse design! FFS if you’re going to make changes, sweep back the nacell supports! That looked SIKK on the refit in tmp! So streamlined, graceful and powerful, like a predator ready to pounce.

I hated the jj-prise initially and now I’ve come to really like it but it definitely could be made better imo… but I’m well biased towards anything that is similar to the constitution refit :p

11. Melllvar - May 20, 2013

I wonder… would you have to be as crazy into Star Trek as I am to even notice the impulse difference??

12. cd - May 20, 2013

I didn’t think they could make it look worse.
But they did.

13. AyanEva - May 20, 2013

I don’t think I ever realized those red lights on the back of the saucer where impulse engines. I thought they were just, I don’t know, decorative or something. lol

I do love the Abramsprise, although it took some getting used to at first. Glad they didn’t change it too much.

14. The Original Spock's Brain - May 20, 2013

@ 8 Chris

I think that’s the warp effect distorting the image…

15. BeyondtheTech - May 20, 2013

I always thought the “refit” was too drastic between TOS and TMP. I always said, “they should’ve never called it a refit. That’s a complete redesign.” This is worthy of calling it “refit” for NuTrek.

16. The Sky's the Limit - May 20, 2013

The saucer section is way different . . . flatter, thinner. The nacelle pylons are more “angular,” and more at a slant . . . closer together, and don’t “bow” as much. The nacelles are redesigned. This is a big time refit, not a “warp distortion.”

17. DonDonP1 - May 20, 2013

Fascinating. I did not know the nuEnterprise underwent a refit, which I thought it was more minor than major. Thanks for sharing! Live long and prosper!

18. somethoughts - May 20, 2013

I hardly noticed and thought it was just distortion.

Too bad there is no 5min flyby treatment to see all the angles and changes.

The orginal refit is still the best, something about slow moving starships in space makes it more epic.

19. Flaming Nacelles Forever - May 20, 2013

Yes, I noticed the refit (including the dorsal spine lighting and the winglets on the nacelles). You missed those.

I also noticed that Praxis has already blown up, and that Quo’Nos was impacted by a nuclear winter without the help of it’s neighbours.

I noticed that the Klingon’s were ‘starting to expand’, having only recently taken over a few other worlds as pointed out by Admiral Marcus.

I noticed that Section 31 was much larger than it was in the original series.

I noticed that Admiral Marcus has both the NX-01 & Drexler refit, and the Dreadnought among his ship collections on his desk.

I noticed that Starbucks was still around in London. AWESOME!

I noticed that [THE VILLAIN #2] wanted the torpedoes fired at him, delivering the [SOMETHING] to him. He had another plan in case [VILLAIN #1] didn’t show up.

There were tonnes of things in the movie that will require many repeated viewings to fully comprehend. Having TrekMovie point them out is cool too.

20. Buzz Cagney - May 20, 2013

#11 I noticed!

21. Kev - May 20, 2013

Thank god they fixed the sagging Nacelles and I just got back from seeing the movie too


I thought they changed the impulse engines…….

and I am pleasantly surprised how good it was, the film I mean, and I figured after the scotty comment in the film that they were going to do this

Impulse I’m sort of on the fence about but it IS congruent with the changes they did to the ship in the TV show with that


they’ll probably go back to it latter, but all I ask is that you make the hotrod seem more balanced and asthetically pleasing, cut down on the blue glow

and maybe rebalance the saucer so its not much wider than the space between the nacelles, like take a line or two of its grid line off of its diameter

maybe give it a light grey simple paint job, just a few key tweaks and they could have something great on there hands.

But as is I am glad they toned down the damn lense flares and toned down the whites, made it seem more like a legit ship.

Good job guys, and that is HIGH praise coming from me

and thank god you remembered your own damn plot lines and things that happened in your own film unlike in the old rick berman star suck shows and movies he made.

22. MPMonroe88 - May 20, 2013


I’ve seen the movie twice and paid special attention to the models both times. Where was the Drexler refit? I just saw the regular NX-01 between the Phoenix and Kelvin.

23. Tired - May 20, 2013

LOL at TrekMovie deleting my constructive criticism in this thread.

24. mdbchud - May 20, 2013

I believe I noticed the font on the registry on the saucer section was different. On the JJ Enterprise from the first movie and STID it was a simple font, whereas after the “refit” at the end of STID it seemed to have the outline around the lettering from the prime versions of the big E. Can anyone confirm this?

25. Mark Newbold - May 20, 2013

What a great article, noticing the lettering is a good spot. Thought she lookedvdifferent but she was always being refit, assume the JJ Enterprise is modular like the D. Agree 100% we need a Hanes manual and a Technical Manual. Think we’ll return to the Prime Timeline at some point. Once we get past TMP era there’s ten years to TWOK. Good time to revert?

26. TrekkerChick - May 20, 2013


Brake lights.

27. DC - May 20, 2013

Honestly, I think this refit is more akin to the refit between the two pilots and the rest of TOS than the TMP refit.

28. Luis - May 20, 2013

I’ve showed dozens of non-Star Trek fans the comparisons between the Original Series/ Motion Picture Enterprises and the new JJTrek one… it boggles their mind when I tell them that some trekkies prefer the “old” models to the new one. They understand the nostalgic feelings involved, but that can’t be an objective reason for preferring the old look. And they aren’t dumb. A lot of trekkies dismiss non-fans as “dumb” or that they “don’t get it”, which is a thinking that got Trek dead for some years or just limping along.

29. DC - May 20, 2013


Well, for me, my issues stem from the size/shape of the nacelles are unappealing to me as well as some of the subtle differences in the curves and silhouette of the JJ Enterprise. The saucer itself I’m pretty ok with, but beyond that…..it’s off-putting aesthetically, and that’s not just nostalgia talking either.

30. JohnRambo - May 20, 2013

only logical changes. a big ship needs big impulse engines.

31. Picard's Slappy Patty - May 20, 2013

If I had my way, I’d get rid of the saucer part. I would keep half of one nacelle, and remove the entire lower hull. In fact, I’d keep just the deflector dish and one nacelle. MAKE IT SO!

32. ilker - May 20, 2013

now it looks like an ugly american car with that red strip (no offense, there are nice american cars, and there are ugly american cars)

33. Dr. Cheis - May 20, 2013

I’d call this refit more akin to the “refit” that took place in between “Where No Man Has Gone Before” and the rest of the first season of TOS.

Only thing that bugs me about it is that now my Playmates Enterprise won’t match the one we see in the new movie.

34. zillabeast - May 20, 2013

Doug Drexler’s Season 5 refit is not seen on Adrmiral Marcus’s desk. You have the Vengeance, the Kelvin, the NX-01 (plain old NX-01), the NX-Alpha/Beta test ship from the Enterprise episode “First Flight”, the Phoenix, and the usual rest of the lineup of explorer ships, to include the XCV-330.

35. Xavier_Storma - May 20, 2013

The poor guys who bought that 5.000 USD model will now be angry, and the company will double its income by sending out the refit.
Same as with IRON MAN and his 1500 suits in IM3. You can sell the Enterprise now twice.
I bet in TREK 3 they will introduce yet another subtile refit.

36. Exverlobter - May 20, 2013

I did not notice the refit, but i realised the 1 year gap while watching the film in the cinema, and that was unnecessary.
Were they just sitting on their backs for 1 year or what?

37. KHAAAN the weasel - May 20, 2013

I noticed the refit when I watched the movie – I think they also added some more lights; yeah, that’s right: an even SHINIER Abramsverse Enterprise.
Well, apart from that, I didn’t really like the new impulse engines – See, I actually loved that moment in Trek 09 when they fly around the ship and you can see just how big and detailed the impulse engines alone were. So I wondered why they thought they had to make them even BIGGER.
Now they remind me of that flawed toy model of the Enterprise E, that was released when “First Contact” came out, but actually looked nothing like the Enterprise in the movie.

38. Exverlobter - May 20, 2013

Why a refit after the ship has been just one year in service?
In TOS it made sense because the ship was already 20 years old.

39. KHAAAN the weasel - May 20, 2013

PS: Here’s a picture of the Playmates toy I was referring to (the left one of course):

40. Melllvar - May 20, 2013

What 1 year gap? I don’t necessarily doubt you but i don’t remember that part….

41. LOFC_Ed - May 20, 2013


I have the one on the left….the original is it not?

I also have the other version of the Enterprise E that were made by another company.

42. mynameschris - May 20, 2013

@38 the ship was pretty banged up by the end of the film so in need for some serious dry dock time, while it was there no doubt the engineers altered the design slightly to improve performance such as a larger impulse drive.

@40 During his speech at the end Kirk mentions it being almost a year since the events of the London bombing, Pikes death etc.

43. Xavier_Storma - May 20, 2013

KHAAAN the weasel

Yeah… both are completely wrong, eventhough the INSURRECTION model at least has it’s impulse engines in the right place.

Get the DST NEMESIS Enterprise-E. That’s the only model so far which has the right proportions (it was scanned from the original CGI model).

44. Kev - May 20, 2013

36: The ship was thoroughly damaged, both engines taken out, most of the hull burned. And Mr Scott in the movie said he had been making progress, changes and advancements to the ship before the end of the film, hinting about a refit he wanted to do.

and with Kirk out for 2 weeks, the ship badly damaged and half of frisco, starfleet command’s main command post taken out by one of there own ships and it being 2259 to 2260.

the ship was probably refitted and being repaired for 6 months, plus all the paperwork, the red tape and just figuring what the hell happened and who’s to blame.

Basically its a wonder the end of the film wasnt set it 2265 with that kind of stuff going down.

and for the guy who said that people couldnt get the trekies liking the old one better its a proportionally unbalanced ship, I havent liked it since I’ve set eyes on it and I’ve seen numerious better looking renditions of it, a refit is more than welcome.

I’ve even seen a doodle of it on paper that looked much better than what they came up with on deviant art, basically arching everything forward.

doing the hotrod thing in a much better way, if I find it ill post it here

45. Melllvar - May 20, 2013

@ KHAAAN the weasel

Flawed as it may have been, it is literally the best childhood memory I possess, recieving this ship for Christmas, probably before even seeing First Contact.

There was a lot of hype over the 1701-E and I had the model!!!
Ah man ship models are the cats pyjamas :)

46. James - May 20, 2013

I went to see Star Trek Into Darkness on Saturday, and I have to say, I was a bit disappointed. From the media coverage, I was expecting something very special, but what I got was a pretty charmless pastiche of Star Trek II. Yes, the special effects were good – and Benedict Cumberbatch’s acting was good. But the revelation of his character, as well as the obvious parallels with TWOK, made it tired viewing. Especially in the last act of the film, it just seemed to scream, ‘I want to be Star Trek II!’

I think it was a wasted opportunity – it had the potential to be so much more, and I don’t think it was anywhere near as good as the original Star Trek II, nor the 2011 Star Trek. I sincerely hope the next instalment stops trying to do homages to what has gone before, and start doing something different.

47. Sherlock - May 20, 2013

Any changes made to the Phaser Pulse Turrets?

48. Robert Gillis - May 20, 2013

“Bottom line is this,” I say with a smile, “I won’t believe it until I read the full story in Nacelles Monthly.”

49. Kapten Kerk - May 20, 2013

@27 @33
I also think this refit is more akin to the refit between the pilots and the first TOS episodes than the TMP (redesign) refit.

From Memory Alpha: “The Enterprise’s first documented refit occurred sometime between 2254 and 2265. Minor changes were made to the ship’s exterior, most notably the impulse engines, warp nacelles, running lights, and hull markings. A second, more extensive refit occurred at some point after her encounter with the galactic barrier in 2265. It involved replacing the bridge module, a newer, smaller deflector dish, and refinements to her warp nacelles”.

The Abramsprise is my third favorite Enterprise coming behind the TMP/Refit and the TOS ships. (What can I say, I love Kirk’s ships!) I prefer the older/narrow impulse engines than the new and wide. The refit impulse engines remind me of KITT’s red scanner.

I can’t decide if the nacelles are different or not. We need new orthographic views. (And a technical manual. And a Haynes Owners Workshop Manual. And an Art Of/Making Of book. And a…..)

50. NCC-73515 - May 20, 2013

Not radical enough, it needs a completely new engineering section ;)

51. Trek Tech - May 20, 2013

Some of the changes were more subtle but the primary hull (saucer) now has concentric ‘terracing’ and engraved grid lines which I swear was a poke at the 1/350th scale Classic ‘E’ modelers. They also changed the Azteking on the saucer from what I can tell to look less random and more like that on the TMP E.

52. oatmeal is boring breakfast food - May 20, 2013

I wonder why they did not call it the “new” NCC-1701-A? Or maybe even have changed the registery all together and call it UFP-1701-A for United Federation of Planets

53. Chekov - May 20, 2013

The refit sucks big time. Especially those impulse engines, they look like a jam sandwich. I prefer the version before the refit, much better. Have nice day.

54. PC3 - May 20, 2013

I was hoping that the nacelle collectors would have been changed to resemble the original red/orange color and that the nacelles themselves would have been slimmed down.

55. smike - May 20, 2013

Refit or not…I want to see that “Five Year Mission” NOW…on TV… THIS would be the time to launch the new show… Do 13 episodes per season so that the actors are only occupied for 3-4 months and available for other projects… Give us the first three seasons up to 2016, then the third bigscreen movie and then the final two seasons, the ones we never got on TOS.

If they show the Five Year Mission in comic books only it would be a captial waste… This is where the adventure is, this is where heroes are made…

56. Commodore Adams - May 20, 2013

I noticed the impulse engines as soon as I saw pics from the movie. Also the protruding part of the hull which runs from the bridge section to the impulse engines has also changed. When you have a passion for industrial design you tend to notice these small changes.

57. Commodore Adams - May 20, 2013

38. Exverlobter Why a refit? After Nero’s attack you think they would leave ships the way they are? No. Better weapons, improves hull armour, etc etc. Same with the Borg introduction by Q as well as wolf 359, Starfleet would upgrade ALL their ships.

58. Pensive's Wetness - May 20, 2013

i dunno…. that wider Impulse engine looks like a evolutionary step backwards, making the JJent look more like the older vessels in Star Fleet… plus, they dont even bother with letting the impulse engines die down before warp (a nice touch in the previous movie)? Anthony, was that intentional that they did that in the end or is that a graffe?

59. Dennis C - May 20, 2013

Looks like there’s a Cylon built into the hull to keep an eye on things back there.

60. thomoz - May 20, 2013

The NCC 1701 on the top of the saucer must have had outlines in the 2009 movie as my 2009 lights-and-sound toy has the letters outlined.

61. Erik Parrent - May 20, 2013

I’m pretty sure that’s not a model of the Vengeance in Marcus’s office. I think that’s April’s Enterprise from the Countdown to Darkness prequel comic.

62. smike - May 20, 2013

@61: I think it is the Vengeance…it’s definitely meant for foreshadowing. This is why the camera focuses on that ship for about three seconds.

63. J - May 20, 2013

@61: Pretty sure it’s Vengeance. Although would it make much sense to keep a model of a secret ship on display?

64. Tuomas - May 20, 2013

58. Pensive’s Wetness – May 20, 2013

Looking at the video frame by frame, it looks to me the impulse exhaust starts dimming just a few frames before the bright flash and jump to warp. It’s very subtle, though, so it might also be just normal variation in the brightness of an operating impulse engine.

65. Daniel Broadway - May 20, 2013

It’s definitely the Vengeance in Marcus’ office. However, I too don’t understand why you’d put a secret ship as a model in your office.

66. Rick Sternbach - May 20, 2013

Say, does anyone recall whether or not the JJ-prise has a bridge dedication plaque? One of my Facebook colleagues seems to think there wasn’t. Would be a shame if it’s not there.

67. Ryan Thomas Riddle - May 20, 2013

There is one. Here’s the image: http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100909045326/memoryalpha/en/images/b/bc/Enterprise_dedication_plaque_(alt).jpg

68. mdbchud - May 20, 2013

No, the 2009 version did not have the outlined lettering. I clearly remember being disappointed that it looked so plain.

To those saying it should now be the 1701 A, it is still the same ship, just with some refit parts. They didn’t change to the A until after the original was completely destroyed in SFS.

69. Tuomas - May 20, 2013

Outlined NCC-1701 lettering in Star Trek (2009):


70. Captain Asaraiel - May 20, 2013

I didn’t notice this during my viewing. Thanks for pointing it out!

Also: I desperately want an Excelsior in this universe.

71. Captain Asaraiel - May 20, 2013

Also: The “A” letter designation is meant to differentiate that it is a different ship in succession. It is also exceedingly rare. The Enterprise has been honored with the same registry number with a letter designation, but I can’t think of another ship. They just get a new registry as far as I can tell.

72. Lords Of Kobol Book - May 20, 2013

#66 — Dedication plaque is on the Memory Alpha page:


(#67 – Your link didn’t work.)

73. NBB-0890-C - May 20, 2013

Did anyone else see the NX-01 easter egg with the little model ships on Marcus desk

74. navy - May 20, 2013

I think that the extra large impulse engines are kind of a waste, if you look at the Enterprise D, the total surface area of the impulse engines is rather small.

I’ve been to the theater twice, but still not enough time to analyse the movie.

I can say this without a doubt, the writing fell short of the actors capabilities.

I have found myself watching sherlock now though, and looking at a Galaxy Note 8.0.

75. JTK2099 - May 20, 2013

His desk had models of the Phoenix, the NX-Alpha, and the NX-01. It was the best part of the movie to me :)

76. JTK2099 - May 20, 2013

If only the refit had done away with those atrocious nacelles!

77. 'Given her all She's got Captain! - May 20, 2013

Funny how some of the fans who frequent this site complain about EVERYTHING JJ & Company do. I’m beginning to wonder if Star Trek fans will EVER be satisfied, because it seems like right now, nothing can make them happy.

And I know it’s not all fans. Just a select few.

78. Alternate Universes Don't Count - May 20, 2013

Because this is all “alternate universe,” none of it really matters. Enterprise could have been refit into a card board tube and it would have no more of a place in Star Trek than JJ’s movies or ships.

So, this is much to do about nothing.

79. Commodore Adams - May 20, 2013

@ 65. Daniel Broadway

Everyone wonders about that. I am assuming that A) most people in the office will not take the time to look at each model. B) Marcus could easily lie and say it is a proposed starship still on the drawing board. C) it was simply used in the movie as foreshadowing, which is was. THREE ANSWERS, all plausible, all viable.

@ 71. NBB-0890-C

Oh yea, as well as the USS Enterprise XCV 330.


I would still love a true gloving warp core, BUT I did love the new main engineering using the fusion laser as the warp core.

80. J - May 20, 2013

@71: There were at least a couple of ships bearing the additional suffix

NCC-1305-E (USS Yamato)
NCC-221B (USS Benedict Cumberbatch, errrr… USS Sherlock Holmes)

according to Memory Alpha (we don’t know if the numeric part of registry number was previously used though)

81. Timmy Spock - May 20, 2013


I COMPLETELY agree with you. But it’s said that haters are gonna hate.

82. Myrth - May 20, 2013


Our current naval ships can spend that long or longer in port for construction etc. the crew still serve aboard, but they operate out of a base. Watches are still stood and the boat is still manned.

83. John from Cincinnati - May 20, 2013

Get rid of the crappy iBridge and Budgeneering!

84. Dr. Image - May 20, 2013

THIS time, I really must agree with the “haters,” etc. cliche.
I cannot believe all the fan pissing and moaning over what really is a spectacular film.Bad writing? What?? Too secretive? Too derivative of the sacred WOK?? My God. How pathetic.
Meanwhile- impulse engines bigger: It’s a a HUGE damn ship! Besides, all that Borg tech from the Narada is, I’m sure, an ongoing development project.

85. sisko - May 20, 2013

@67, @72 That can’t be the actual one in the movie. Some of the details on it are wrong (here comes the nitpicking). That plaque says “San Francisco Fleet Yards” when we clearly saw her being built in Riverside, Iowa. And it says “Where No Man Has Gone Before” when “No One” was mentioned in the movie.

That’s just bizarre.

Of course I’m bizarre too, so there’s that… :-)

86. Valley Forge - May 20, 2013

Well, the rechristening did kind’ve imply updates.

87. Pensive's Wetness - May 20, 2013

@77 thats because if they do something STUPID, we as consumers get the RIGHT to b*tch. Now that i got some time to time about that change in the Impulse eternals, it really is a shame because that makes the design… i dunno. less cool? does that mean that all future Star Fleet vessels gonna have that huge arse Impulse Grill? what was the point then to using the TMP era looking impulse enternals in the first place? that alone sets the JJEnt from the other ships in ST2009 (as well as being a humage to the TMP-era ships). its ok to change stuff, but i question the judgement that went into this particular change because it really seems like a big step backwards… unless something changed on the inside to belie the need to change the arse end of the Primary Hull… derp. @81 yeah, we’ll b*tch. So what? Haters may hate but at least we are JUSTIFIED to be annoyed at times. at least give us that, mate.

88. Ashley - May 20, 2013

I still hate the new impulse engines. >.<

89. Clinton - May 20, 2013

I very much like the attention to detail of altering the ship as part of the year-long repair process.

90. Phil - May 20, 2013

USS Hornet. CV-8, CV-12…

91. Robman007 - May 20, 2013

@55.. They can’t do the TV..Bad Robot tried to go in that direction but CBS won’t allow it. Too many issues over license rights. Probably one of the reasons JJ bolted for Wars and why this or the next will be the last. Hard to do anything when your franchise rights are owned by two different companies, one of which wants nothing to do with the show outside of cashing a check and milking existing product (CBS)

92. AWinnerisYou - May 20, 2013

Can someone tell me why JJ has an obsession with blonde hair / blue eyes? Even the redesign Klingons have blue eyes. Yes, I know this for a fact. Watched the movie again last night and specifically looked for ’em.

93. PEB - May 20, 2013

@91 That’s could be Trek’s undoing. It’s hard to not be able to join the two (which it seems is what the fans really want). Will this ever change?

94. REM1701 - May 20, 2013

I still HATE the Bridge (Giant I-POD) & the Enigine Room (Recycled set from “Titanic). Hermman Zimmerman should’ve been in-charge of the “refit”

95. Pensive's Wetness - May 20, 2013

@91 do you think (assuming that Bad Robot isnt contractually required to produce a 3rd and final movie) that STID will be the last one JJ makes and Paramount will FAIL to make another for the 50th anniversery?

96. George Zip - May 20, 2013

> I’ve even seen a doodle of it on paper that looked much better than what they
> came up with on deviant art, basically arching everything forward.

Agreed. I’ve tried, but I just can’t get into this version. Looks too much like something from a Naboo Shipyard.

And I cannot stand what they did re/using a brewery for the engine room. It just killed the whole suspension of disbelief I had in the last film (and the vats as listening stations? JJ, that works okay when you’re playing Star Trek with friends, but when you’re making a big budget movie, you build sets).

97. sisko - May 20, 2013

@96, considering that the man who redesigned the Enterprise, Ryan Church, worked on the Star Wars Prequels, that shouldn’t surprise you that the Enterprise-JJ looks like something out of Star Wars.

98. J - May 20, 2013


“that works okay when you’re playing Star Trek with friends, but when you’re making a big budget movie, you build sets”

Well said!!!

99. smike - May 20, 2013

@91: And THAT is exactly the problem! Why on Earth would CBS NOT want to go forward with a new TV show? If they don’t plan on doing their own new version of Trek in the near future, they’d be stupid not to find some legal agreement with Paramount / Bad Robot! It only makes sense if they want to launch their own TV show in the near future. After all, they mainly are a freakin’ TV CHANNEL!?! Why not having Star Trek as their flagship? No, I’m sure they’re just stalling…waiting for the right moment to strike…

Apart from that: How did this mess happen in the first place? And why is Paramount not able to buy those right back? It’s one of their most valuable properties…

Each studio has to clean its slate and get the priorities straight for the next ten years are going to be pivotal. Either you are able to place your trademarks successfully on the market or you’re out of business. Disney is now in control of some of the biggest franchises: Star Wars, most of the Marvelverse, Pirates of the Caribbean. WB has got DC, the Hobbit, Fox will further explore the X-Men branch and Avatar… it’s soon to become a fixed system of big players. If Paramount wants a piece of the action, set the pieces…

100. Cody - May 20, 2013

The new Enterprise does not look like it came out of Star Wars… it looks like it came out of Star Trek. And it is an absolutely awesome version of the starship Enterprise, and looks generally beautiful in these films. Period.

101. Factchecker - May 20, 2013

Let’s re-invent the wheel while we’re at it….

102. Tuomas - May 20, 2013

100. Cody – May 20, 2013

Love your comment, sums up my thoughts pretty well. I like the graceful curves they’ve given the iconic classic.

And I don’t mind the new impulse engine. It gives the back of the saucer section a nice and streamlined look. The engine now feels integrated into the ship’s design because it doesn’t stand out.

103. New Horizon - May 20, 2013

> 100. Cody – May 20, 2013

That’s just like, your opinion man. Period.

Aesthetically, it’s an unbalanced mashup. Designed by committee.

There was an early draft Ryan Church mocked up that looked much better.

104. Hoosier Joe - May 20, 2013

I noticed this earlier (see copied post, below)….so glad that you put the video and photos on here. It does look like they changed the nacelles too. I just wonder what other changes have been made? I was kind of hoping that they would give the ol’ E (or new E in the Abramsverse) the same nacelles as TOS Enterprise….now how cool would that have been if they made her look even more like the TOS version?

From the First Poll and Open Thread:
480. Hoosier Joe – May 16, 2013
Also, not really an easter egg, just an observation: when the Enterprise warps away for the last time in the film, is the impulse engine in the back of the primary hull bigger? I really tried to notice if there were any changes in the ship…..that was really the only change that I was able to see before it shot into warp. Did anybody else notice anything that changed, even on the interior (the final bridge scene)? Very curious about that if the Enterprise will look a little different in the next film.

The nacelles look the same, which I actually thought they might change (to make it look more like TOS). Anyone’s thoughts or observations on that, and from my previous post about any easter eggs and/or shout outs to other series (Example: NX-01 on Marcus’ desk) or references to TOS that anyone spotted? I am “understandably curious”…. :)

105. rogue_alice - May 20, 2013

OMG! The amount of whining.

106. Trekman_dave - May 20, 2013

@100 Cody Well said

107. Will - May 20, 2013

Really guys! Your arguing over a ship refit! I personally love the new enterprise because she looks like a ship that could really exsist in the distant future. So what that she has a larger impule drive and slightly altered nacelles! Look how many trek fans had a fit when the motion picture came out. they thought it was an entirely new enterprise all together. I served on several navy vessels and some of them required to be in drydock for months at a time just to have new computeres installed on them or new rutters!

You also have to remember that this is a reboot! Startrek was dying a slow death and JJ decided to breath some life back into her.

108. OIscar - May 20, 2013

I have to say the only thing i did not enjoy about the new film is how so many fans threw their toys out the pram when it wasn’t EXACTLY what they wanted.

109. Trekfan1978 - May 20, 2013

@100 Cody I agree with you man. Thank you for your comment. I think it is a beautiful design and the bridge is a vibrant piece of sci-fi architecture. Why have so many fans become so fearful of change in the world of Star Trek? I guess Kirk was right at the end of the Undiscovered Country: “People can be frightened of change”.

110. Kapten Kerk - May 20, 2013





Yup. Absolutely hideous. ;-)

(Images by the great Tobias Richter)

111. Basement Blogger - May 20, 2013

Excellent work Anthony. Still want the beauty shot of the Enterprise proudly displaying the words United Federation of Planets on the side.

112. Michael Hall - May 20, 2013

#72, thanks for the fixed link. Mr. Sternbach, as a consummate Trek insider, any opinions as to why the dedication plaque still reads “San Francisco Naval Yards” instead of “Iowa Cornfield”? :-)

113. Aashlee - May 20, 2013

Props to Cody @100! I love a refreshingly positive attitude, and I agree with you!

How cool is it that as the bridge crew develops and seasons, so does the ship! Nice detail, ILM!

114. HubcapDave - May 20, 2013

The obvious change are the impulse engines.

It looks like they’ve built up the “spine” that runs behind the bridge and added illumination that runs the length of it.

the nacelles look more or less the same, but it looks like they’ve straightened out the support pylons a bit (though that could just be the warp effect)

115. Thomas Vinelli - May 20, 2013

I laugh at the debates here for something that’s not even real. If this was a Berman production , nobody would be crying about anything. How many refits have had in the Berman Star Trek world?? JJ does it and everybody jumps on the lets bash JJ wagon. You call yourself fans…yeah right. This place has become a know it all club. You guys know everything better then anybody thats made a Trek film. I’d love to see somebody here write a Star trek story for the next film. I bet you get very few takers because when it comes right down to it , you know nothing about Writing , producing, directing or acting, just a bunch of internet big mouths. LOL

116. Disinvited - May 20, 2013

#114. Thomas Vinelli – May 20, 2013

“Bob, you interact with fans occasionally about your films. Do you glean information from those conversations?

Orci: Yeah, absolutely. We interact with them because we like to take in information, good or bad. Because we were fans, we understand what it is to feel strongly about a certain property or not, and also, we would have loved at the time that we were watching to be able to interact with the filmmakers. For us it’s both doing what we would have hoped we could have done as kids and also hearing insights, even the most negative comment may sometimes contain an insight. “Star Trek” has existed for 50 years and it doesn’t simply belong to us. It belongs to all the fans. They’re the ones who kept it alive for 50 years so it seems wrong not to at least hear them out. Now, do we always agree? No. Are some of them super-mean? Yes. [laughs] But that’s okay. We’re very lucky to be part of this and no opinion should be ignored no matter how it’s phrased.”


117. SPATAN555 - May 20, 2013

I am sorry to say both Reboot version looks hideous. Nothing beats the original motion picture Refit Enterprise. The JJ Abrams versions looks squashed.

Not impressed.

118. sisko - May 20, 2013

@114, for me, while I love these Abrams’ movies, I loathe the set design. Take the iBridge for example: take a look at the original bridge (be it the one from The Cage or the series version) and compare it to this new one. Kirk can’t see the whole damn bridge any more. There’s too many floor-to-ceiling panels in the way. The brewery engineering room? Why? What’s wrong with the one they came up with in ST:TMP? That one made sense. The Constitution Class Refit is my favorite version of the Enterprise. To me, that was a well thought out and real (well, could be real) Starship.

The Enterprise-JJ is the size of the Enterprise-D. Why?

I’ve never said that I could write, produce, direct, or act in a Star Trek story, in fact at the beginning of what I wrote, I said that I loved these movies. The story and acting and directing and sound are great. The minor tweaks to the transporter effect and the warp speed effect are just that: minor, who cares. But the changes to the Enterprise herself just make no sense. (And did you see what she was capable of in STID?)

And don’t get me started on Berman-Trek. The last good Star Trek series was DS9 (and, IMO, it was better than TNG which I loved as well, and was closest to the spirit of TOS). Trust me, I cried (as in complained) a lot about the design of Enterprise (or should I say, the Akiraprise MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHA). That show was a prequel to TNG not TOS.

It’s not that hard to make some or most of us happy. To make all of us happy would take an act of Congress, which we all know is damn near impossible. nuTrek has a great story (see, I’m happy). But that 20th century loud speaker and door pusher opener thingy on Delta Vega (Vulcan System) was just poor set design (see, not happy, but I’ll live).

119. richardg - May 20, 2013

I like it. She has grown on me. She looked fantastic in this film.

120. JohnRambo - May 20, 2013

@4. sisko
“Still doesn’t look good.”

You’re right, it really doesn’t look good……..It looks incredible good!

121. jim - May 20, 2013

planned obsolescence reaches the future!

122. richardg - May 20, 2013

I always felt the old enterprise was too small. They changed the scale of the bridge exterior after the pilot episode. The refit in TMP was meant to look bigger, so the bridge exterior was sized down again. The larger enterprise seemed to make sense, in a way for me corrected the scale issues of the original. Im sure we will debate this over and over but i am warming to the changes, and i understand why they have made them.

I was wanting red bussard collectors at the end of the film. This would have made me even more happy.

123. JohnRambo - May 20, 2013

@21. Kev

“Thank god they fixed the sagging Nacelles and I just got back from seeing the movie too


They didn’t fix the Nacelles because there were not sagging in the 2009 Movie.
The Picture of this Enterprise Model is simply wrong designed

But they did change the Nacelles at the end of STID a little bit.

124. Rick Sternbach - May 20, 2013

#67/#72 et al – Thanks; checked out the Memory Alpha pic.

125. Aaron - May 20, 2013


126. Aaron - May 20, 2013

@125 I am sorry that was meant for 115.

127. Rick Sternbach - May 20, 2013

#112 – I think some of us talked about this sort of thing on TNG. The Ent-D was supposedly built at the Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards on and around Mars, but commissioned at San Francisco, Earth. I have no problem with the JJ-prise beings assembled in Iowa but made officially part of Starfleet elsewhere.

128. sisko - May 20, 2013

@118 Apparently 114 became 115. D’oh Gilligan!

129. rob asbury - May 20, 2013

khan origin movie?

130. Eduardo Cordeiro - May 20, 2013

Perhaps the Enterprise has been repaired at the San Francisco Shipyards.

131. Jesse Johnson - May 20, 2013

Still butt-ass ugly.

132. Shatner's Hairpiece - May 20, 2013

@73 & 75 etc

The thing that made me smile the most was not the sight of The Phoenix, or the NX-01 (which I seem to remember everyone despised back in the day – what gives?) but the sight of the RING SHIP (XCV-330) last seen in the TMP gallery.

As for the refit of the JJ-Prise.. it’s kind of meh. I’ve never been completely happy with the design, and this refit, while it’s possibly a small improvement just does not go far enough.

133. Red Dead Ryan - May 20, 2013


“Still butt-ass ugly”.

What is “butt-ass”? LOL!

134. al - May 20, 2013

I hate the engineering hull of the ship. The saucer and nacelles are cool. When it comes to the interior…I Hate engineering…it just seems so out of place. I did like the new interiors we got to see in the movie.
If we do get a 3rd film…will Sulu finally get the Excelisor ?

135. Dean-O - May 20, 2013

I love the Ryan Church Enterprise design. Now ILM noses-in on the design and puts an ugly ’90’s Oldsmobile-lookin’ tail light strip on the back as an “updated” impulse deck. Way to cheapen the design ILM. I’ll stick with the much cooler looking 2009 design details.

136. Steve Troop - May 20, 2013

Too bad that during a year of refitting the Enterprise they couldn’t manage to put any paint on the walls.

137. Lone Browncoat - May 20, 2013

110. Kapten Kerk – May 20, 2013

How’d you get those URLs?

I managed to grab all ten from that folder but is there more wallpaper?

138. Stewie G - May 20, 2013

Here’s all the models that were in Admiral Marcus’ office (minus the Vengeance):


139. Lone Browncoat - May 20, 2013


OK, didn’t give it time to load before, nor the scroll down.

Grabbing now.

140. Kev - May 20, 2013

The guys who hate this film really need to look at this a different way. with all of the problems and bad writing Rick Berman did and all the terrible trek they made under his leadership.

This is still far better than anything he could have produced and made back thenand dont look at this as a Star Trek 2, look at this as a new space seed.

and now are you going to flat out lie to me and tell me that hasnt dated a wee bit?

I mean its a new universe with new rules and maybe some of the same basic ideas.

Although I must admit I dont like the new impulse engines either, still though.

Thank god this isnt a dear doctor, a generations where they forget to change the shield frequency and do anything to save the D.

this isnt STUPID is what I’m saying and that is a good thing.

it has problems but it doesnt treat its audience as idiots, those who are wishing that we had old trek back and want to do something different with it.

and space seed was an episode that could have something interesting done with it and thus they chose it.

With the refit that was probably an open way for the next director to change the ship as they wanted, so it doesnt mean its set in stone.

141. Bob [Into Darkness is worse than Nemesis] Tompkins - May 20, 2013

The refit Enterprise won’t have Bones McCoy or a sickbay, since death no longer has any dominion according this latest Star Drek.
Matter of fact, starships themselves should be irrelevant given the common use of transwarp transporters….

142. Dean-O - May 20, 2013


You are spot-on correct. The plot holes in this visual extravaganza are larger than the black holes in the 2009 reboot.

143. GG - May 20, 2013

Still sucks. Actually, the old impulse engines looked better than the new (long, thin) ones do.

Still don’t like the curved nacelle struts (as opposed to the old straight ones). It forms a “U” shape. The lines just don’t flow. Just doesn’t look right.

Everyone (every director) has to put their own “stamp” on things, for some reason. Just like McCoy once said, “I know directors, and they LOOOVE to change things” LOL

Like the old saying goes, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.

Let me put it this way.. does anyone think that JJ is going to change the Millenium Falcon? No, of course not. It’s perfect, just the way it is.

144. Marja - May 21, 2013

55 Smike, I AGREE SO MUCH !!! [actors will be much costlier though]

Re: the E
I loved the nuEnterprise before the refit. She’s graceful [and I love the blue in the nacelles]. Don’t care too much for the “hot rod” vanes on the new nacelles :(

145. Marja - May 21, 2013

85 Sisko, that appears to be the “Enterprise” Enterprise plaque, i.e., Archer’s ship NX01.

I think I saw here at TM a horrid CLEAR plaque with etching in it as nuEnterprise’s plaque. THAT is one anti-tradition I’d like to see ended! Bring back a brass/bronze plaque. [shivers] My god.

146. Marja - May 21, 2013

99 Smike, we agree again. CBS would prob hold Trek hostage until Paramount coughed up MEGAbucks, damn them.

100 Cody, she’s a beautiful lady, and we love her, even as she goes thru changes. Still prefer 2009 version tho’ :)

110 Kerk, thanks, I downloaded a copy of every single one :)

118 Sisko, I agree, at least on the glass panels b/t Captain and Bridge officers. Designers could have been placed at 90-deg angle between each station, with line of sight b/t station officers. Stupid design flaw. Uhura has to run out from behind her panel to see Kirk and be seen in the dive suit scene. Gaghhh!

147. Paul - May 21, 2013

Is it just the different angle, or are the nacelle pylons more straight now?

148. Kapten Kerk - May 21, 2013

@137 Lone Browncoat
@146 Marja


Images from every Enterprise by the great Tobias Richter and his company The Light Works. Some GORGEOUS wallpapers there!!!

P.S.: IMHO Enterprise 2009 > Enterprise 2013 (small difference of course)

149. Lone Browncoat - May 21, 2013

Yep, already done, but thanks.

150. Kapten Kerk - May 21, 2013

138. Stewie G – May 20, 2013
Here’s all the models that were in Admiral Marcus’ office (minus the Vengeance):

And here is the USS Vengeance:


(Images from Quantum Mechanix Inc. (QMx))

151. Tony - May 21, 2013

@141 Hilarious (sigh) uersname!!! Anyone with even half an imagination can see that those issues won’t be an issue in future films. But no, pick on the film for the sake of it.

152. Captian Ransom - May 21, 2013

@89: there is only one star trek universe (two if you count the mirror universe) and jj’s movies are not part of it.

STID was so god awful i couldn’t believe what i was watching. from mccoy trying to bring a tribble back to life while the enterprise was in ruins to spock’s pathetically out of character KHAAAAAAN at the end, this movie blatantly pissed on all that is trek. scotty conveniently quits so he can be on the vengeance later, cumby’s boring and one-dimensional khan was ininspiring. the only scene worth a damn was pike’s lecture to kirk at the beginning about consequences, but just when you think there’s gonna be some real character development kirk has the enterprise back 5 minutes later. so much for consequences. then at the end kirk is back 5 minutes later again.

By far the worst star trek movie ever.

153. Captain Rickover - May 21, 2013

BTW: The “refit” got the Kelvin’s old Impulse Engine. What a refit….

154. SNM - May 21, 2013

@152. That’s not true. McCoy was testing Harrison’s blood sample on a Tribble right after he surrendered and was in the ship’s brig. It was much later in the story after the ship was in battle that he (by chance) noticed signs of life in the Tribble due to the prior injection.

155. Sebastian S. - May 21, 2013

I pointed that out to my wife after the movie… eye rolling ensued.


156. Sebastian S. - May 21, 2013

And did anyone else hear the TOS ‘brig/medical lab’ sound FX in the background during Khan’s brig scene?

Ben Burtt (as usual) did an amazing job modernizing and updating the TOS sound FX. He is the John Williams of sound FX.

157. Red Dead Ryan - May 21, 2013


“By far the worst star trek movie ever.”

By far the worst comment on TrekMovie.Com ever.


158. Paul - May 21, 2013

@152 – there’s infinite number of universes existing all at once… that means all the possibilities happen all at once, each in it’s own universe.

JJ’s universe is the one where Nero goes back in time and destroys Kirk’s father’s ship, Vulcan and stuff. There’s also another universe where Nero never goes back, and yet another where Spock succeeded in saving Romulus, and yet another where Spock was eaten by le-matya… since our heroes “travel in time” all the time, you can never be sure which universe you’re watching; because, obviously, there is no coming back to your original timeline once you leave it (because by going back in time, you’re becoming a part of a completely new timeline starting with your arrival). When you “go back”, all you can hope for is a closest possible approximate.

JJ’s movies simply take place in a self-contained alternate timeline (much like nearly all of TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise did). In the world of Star Trek, it is nothing unprecedented. Just bear with it and wait for different creative group to take over. Which is bound to happen rather soon in the current Hollywood ecosystem, considering they’re already making a *new* new remake of Batman not even five years after the last one ended.

159. EM - May 21, 2013

I didn’t think that they could make it look better…but they did!
Everything about this movie makes me optimistic about the future of Trek!
Thanks to everyone involved in making this movie. And casting Benedict Cumberbatch was a stroke of genius@

160. BornBrave - May 21, 2013

I wish the JJ-prise would have been DOA and the next Enterprise would be a dreadnought class like the Vengence. It looks much more like a pre JJ ship, just paint it Starfleet white. Surprisingly this deadnought was not like the dreadnought from the original technical manual from the 1970’s

161. Chris - May 21, 2013

My first thought, from only seeing the trailers, is the Enterprise is destroyed.
Near the end of the film I was expecting a new ship, as done in Trek 4, because much of STID is just recycled from prior films anyway.
Then, at the end of the film I was surprised to see not a new ship, but a subtle refit. I had expected the big bulky nacelles to be gone, replaced by a stylized TOS style nacelle with the rotating blue lights.

162. Stewie G - May 21, 2013

@152 Captain Ransom – Wow Capt….you disliked the movie so much you had to post the exact same comment for two different articles.

163. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 22, 2013

#162 – Yes, I know. Excessive, obsessive hatred. Not good.

164. workforkirk - May 22, 2013

The fins on the rear of the nacelles have also been changed, in addition to the impulse engines. The area behind the bridge dome has also been changed.

I LOVE the big nacelles, please Abrams, do not change them! :-)

165. Mark - May 22, 2013

I’m mad at everyone and can’t stand anything.

166. Bias - May 22, 2013

Apparently the only valid opinions accepted here are the ones that JJ pays for.

167. Wannabe Writer - May 22, 2013

I read once…somewhere that what someone s considers “beautiful” is a matter of millimeters. For example…if a person’s eyes are “too” close or too “far” apart. One millimeter could make all the difference.

I also ready once that the design of the original was conceived based on protection. The nacelles fall behind the saucer section – minimizing exposure. This and other aspects have been carried over to the new E

For me the new E is almost right on. There is nothing wrong with her styling…except for me the nacelles are just a bit too close together. They may be the same distance apart as the original but the size causes them to appear too close. If they were just a “millimeter” farther apart I think it would capture the grace everyone is looking for.

168. Matthewbriggs - May 22, 2013

@91 this could be a good read for you http://www.blastr.com/2013-5-16/why-jj-abrams-tried-shut-down-star-trek-tos-merchandising

169. SoonerDave - May 22, 2013

Minor tweaks to the Big E are “meh” to me. Not sure the point of the wide impulse deck. Thought the ends of the warp nacelles paid a bit more homage to the TOS Enterprise engines, but I still like the TMP Enterprise best of all. It has grace and elegance that the JJPrise kinda, I dunno, lacks.

170. Disinvited - May 23, 2013

#99. smike – May 20, 2013

Les Moonves (CBS) has made it known that he doesn’t understand science-fiction television and that he won’t invest in things that he doesn’t understand.

The odd thing is that CBS runs the WB partnered CW network which merged the former WB and UPN networks. You would think with the CW’s success with genre shows that Les would find that an ideal place to home new Trek TV. But I can only imagine he thinks ST has to be an expensive FX laden property to succeed and the CW, formed from 2 bankrupt networks, hasn’t pockets deep enough?

171. Jovius the Romulan - May 24, 2013

Call me crazy… but I like the slightly altered design. It’s just enough that it’s plausible. There is precedence for technology to grow in just a couple of years and fine tweak small design flaws that were apparent once the ship was on its shakedown cruise.

The 2009 Enterprise has really grown on me, but I like the nacelles even better on this one. I’m sure we’ll spot even more changes once the film comes to Blu-ray.

Keep in mind not everyone liked the refit from TMP at first either…

172. Lone Browncoat - May 24, 2013

No one seems to remember Geoffery Mandel’s original cutaway of Walter “Matt” Jefferies’ TOS nacelles. They had everything in one housing, processing/converting machinery behind the bussards, with the a-m storage tanks, behind those were the big reactors, then the field generators with the “space-matrix restoration cowl”[s] last. I love the refit in TMP,except the fishtail nacelles, at least Cawley’s crew lit up the fronts for the new Phase II, based on the mid 1970’s sketches/drawings.
Anti-matter storage was moved in TMP to the bottom of what was called the intermix chamber(Andrew Probert/David Kimble drawings/cutaways) then renamed that term I detest “Warp Core” during the Berman era. While it still is used in 2009 and now at least they’re using something that in the reality dose, you wouldn’t or shouldn’t know that anything was going on inside it other than with instrumentation. Better than having winky-blinky light effects.
With its’ flaws the movie has grown on me, I like the shuttle interior, I like the Vengeance bridge[looks better than the E’s].
Though Section 31 came out of the Bermanverse, I hope for the construction of sister ships is in their future.
With the small crew, even the one-person operation, as mentioned by Harrison/Khan/BC, who also spoke to the computer, I wonder if it was fitted with Daystrom’s M5 or it’s successor?
I noticed a variety of vehicles, in the London scene, that one clearly had no wheels, some smart-car type had them [hear tyre squeals] while some flew, indicative of different levels of operator licences’ . What AP calls a barge looks a lot like an automated garbage truck, like the ones from the Firefly episode “Trash”.

173. ug - May 25, 2013

“With its’ flaws the movie has grown on me”

In any highly flawed piece of work, its defenders usually strike this tone of kind of willing or brainwashing themselves into liking it.

174. Lone Browncoat - May 25, 2013

No brainwashing at all, you twit, if anything I’m far more critical
in my views as to the failings of the scriptwriting. The format of these web-based blogging and responses fails to consider the time for each poster to compose their responses, plus the lack of an edit option, unlike Usenet or forum boards.

I was merely conveying my enjoyment of this movie for the
action/adventure roller coaster that it is.
Further comments in other sections.

175. DJT - May 25, 2013

Looks the the rear headlights of a Lincoln MKC.

176. Justin - May 26, 2013

“The guys who hate this film really need to look at this a different way”

The people who have a problem with people who dislike the film really need to look at this a different way. You can blame Berman and company all you want, but I don’t seem to recall any of the TNG films blatantly rehashing their previous movie.

Not only is there a nearly VERBATIM ripoff of Wrath of Khan, but even points of Star Trek 09 were rehashed. I have all of the earlier Star Trek movies on DVD and Blu-ray, I like them and when I want to watch either of them, I can do so at my leisure. I should NOT, however, be expected to pay money to watch a story I have basically already seen before under the guise of a NEW movie.

People bashed Nemesis for ripping off Wrath of Khan, yet with Nemesis it was FAR less blatant. It is the height of hypocrisy to slam Berman and company only to turn around and laud Abrams of company for the same offense.

I left Into Darkness with a sense of disappointment, an experience I never had with any of the previous Trek movies, even the much maligned Nemesis. I was disappointed because Star Trek 09 gave Abrams and company an essentially blank slate. They could tell entirely new stories which didn’t rely on any crutch from the past but, for some reason, they had to take scenes from their first outing and rehash them along with bits of Wrath of Khan.

It doesn’t mean I hated the movie, I liked it but it was FAR from a fresh story and as someone pulled out the “people can be very frightened of change” quote, I find it ironic that those same people are so stuck in the past that they want to see rehashes of old stories with the new cast. Had absolutely nothing about the movie been different except for “Rick Berman” being credited as the producer, I imagine the same old arguments about unoriginality and bad writing would be thrown about, but now that Berman ISN’T the scapegoat everybody can go to, they heap on the praise when, really, the movie could have been SO much more.

We don’t all have to like every single frame of film to be Star Trek fans and just because people voice their criticisms does NOT make them “haters” anymore than the people who spew unconditional love are “sheep” but if people aren’t allowed to voice their criticisms then people aren’t allowed to voice their praise either.

It works BOTH ways, so whether people liked the movie or disliked it, they need to grow up and ACCEPT that others have a differing yet equally VALID opinion as their own. They can’t call someone a “hater” when they are “hating” on the “haters.”

IDIC – Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations

177. Trekoid - May 27, 2013

#66, #67 #72, #112

To get an idea of placement of the dedication plaque, you can barely see it to the right of the turbolift control panel in this photo http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18l0t986y41ygjpg/ku-xlarge.jpg that is part of the set of images release in io9’s eclusive article at http://io9.com/exclusive-never-before-seen-photos-from-inside-j-j-abr-476164858.

The reflective silver doesn’t stand out against the white walls.

178. Trekoid - May 27, 2013

When I saw it in the theater, I knew that it somehow looked a little different in that final scene, I was just never that great at picking out the specific details without screen grabs.

Some of the other comments picked up on this, but why no mention of the enlarged nacelles in the article? From the midpoint back, the whole rear 50% of the nacelles are larger in volume.

179. Captain Peabody - May 27, 2013

All I want is orange nacelles. Like, I really, really, really want them. Do you hear me, Boborci? Make it happen!


180. Brian - June 3, 2013

Umm… is is just me or when viewed from the front or rear, are the warp nacelles too close together -as in unaesthetically too close?

181. KAP - June 6, 2013

NCC-1701-JJ Warp drives suck. Secondary Hull, looks like smashed clamshell.
NCC-1701-D Whole ship looks like a smashed clamshell.

NCC-1701 (TOS) NCC-1701 AND 1701-A

They are the only believable, and realistic ships.

All the rest look like childs toys.

182. DireLeon - June 10, 2013

I was really hoping they’d completely ditch the ‘hot-rod’ crap and make it more realistic. The great thing about the original designs was that they looked and felt like naval ships in space. From the battleship grey hulls to the registry numbers and torpedo bays. I’ll never understand why they went this direction with their designs. And what is with the Battlestar Galactica sized shuttle bay? No wonder they made her so big. You had to to fit any kind of engineering section into the secondary hull! Move the neck and saucer forward so you can put the nacelles where they belong. I could go on and on….

Thing that perplexes me the most? Except for the Enterprise design, I really freaking love these films!

Oh, and those Impulse engines look like something I painted on my model ships with my mom’s nail polish as a kid. (Yes, I got in trouble for that.)

183. James - June 15, 2013

The only thing about the AR Enterprise that really annoys me is the fact that the engineering section is still a very large open space and that it would be easy to suck out 50% of the crew by breaching the secondary hull. They also appear to have not invented force fields either. The phasers need more than 2 settings as well. This version of Trek is purely for entertainment purposes only which is not a bad thing since I do like being entertained but this version is not for actual science that can be referenced in any legitimate way shape or form. TOS and TNG had real science in them.

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