Why did he need to do it?

[Devon]

To put it more simply, it's an ego thing for the directors. JJ not unlike Robert Wise, wanted to write himself into the mega-property-icon know as Star Trek.

It would be hard for him not to as J.J. is undoubtedly the biggest director/producer Star Trek has ever had in modern times, maybe ever. He already had written himself in just by signing on. He didn't need a different Enterprise design to do that.

Though, ironically, J.J. hasn't let his ego get in the way in the press when making sure that the writers and everyone else involved was acknowledged for the film's success. I really don't remember him taking too much of the credit for other people's work, unlike certain past Trek producers.

But WHY wouldn't it work? A slight refit of it worked FINE for several pictures. So why just a drastic reworking THIS time?

The Enterprise that appeared in those films was just as "drastically" different as the new Enterprise. The only difference being the differences themselves. In short, the "drastic" angle is a bit over exaggerated I think.

You look at it, you know it's the Enterprise. Good enough.

Given an appropriate detailed treatment, the TOS Big E would have been FINE.

*Why* would it?

 

[scotpens]

I wanted to see a Star Trek with an A-list cast, an A-list production design, a strong focus on character, and set during the Technicolor, art-deco years of TOS. . . What surprises me everytime I watch TOS is just how narrow-thin the "neck" of the Enterprise was, and just how long and spindly the 'arms' were that attached the warp nacelles to the secondary hull.

"Art deco" is a term applied to the modernistic architecture, industrial design and graphic design of the 1930s. New York's Chrysler Building is a good example. What does that have to do with Trek TOS?

The original Enterprise is a classic, graceful, elegantly proportioned, beautiful design. With a little imagination, the warp nacelles atop those tall, slender pylons evoke images of sails and masts. The JJ-prise looks like the saucer was lifted straight from the Refit/Enterprise A, and the secondary hull and warp engines were redesigned by Harley J. Earl when he was drunk. In one word: FUGLY.

YMMV.

 

[Cyke101]

People keep saying that.

But WHY wouldn't it work? A slight refit of it worked FINE for several pictures. So why just a drastic reworking THIS time?

I don't think the TMP refit was "slight" by any means. Almost everything was overhauled, and the only thing that was truly kept the primary configuration. Even the nacelle struts were moved!

Pretty much, the TOS-E wouldn't work because it simply wouldn't have fit the feel and scale of the films. As much as we all love TOS, we could still tell that it was a model on strings. In order to take on V'Ger's plasma shots or the new EXTREME warp effects, you'd need a ship that would look like it could meet those challenges.

I was very much against the destruction of the E-D in Generations (I still am, by the way), but there's a clear difference of philosophy between the E-D and the E-E. Even if the latter was to be made closer to the former, we'd still see something tougher and less diplomatic to reflect the films it would be in.

 

[The Wormhole]

The look of the Enterprise from the TV show wouldn't work for the big screen

People keep saying that.

But WHY wouldn't it work? A slight refit of it worked FINE for several pictures. So why just a drastic reworking THIS time?

Given an appropriate detailed treatment, the TOS Big E would have been FINE.

I'm just quoting Robert Wise. He seemed like he knew what he was talking about.

 

[Sabataage]

The look of the Enterprise from the TV show wouldn't work for the big screen

People keep saying that.

But WHY wouldn't it work? A slight refit of it worked FINE for several pictures. So why just a drastic reworking THIS time?

Given an appropriate detailed treatment, the TOS Big E would have been FINE.

It was a slight refit! Sorry to yell, but I really am sick of this. We're the only ones who notice this shit. Not the average movie goer or Trek fan. For all intents and purposes, the "JJterprise" is the Enterprise. My brother who watched this stuff as religiously as I did when we were growing up, took no exception to the alterations they made. "What differences? That was the Enterprise." He's not alone. Nobody I talk knows what the hell we're all complaining about.

 

[DaveyNY]

It all boils down to Extremely Subjective Personal Asthetics...

To Each His or Her Own, can't be seen any more plainly, then when it comes to which version of the Old Girl one prefers.


It also has a lot to do with who's in control... JJ Wins. (some of Us lose)

 

[Aragorn]

Looks like the Enterprise to me. Of course, it's to be expected that some people here go all "Nick Saban" or "Roy Williams" and think the ship alteration is the greatest catastrophe in human history.

As opposed to something I like to call common sense:

And it's not like it's so different. You make it sound like the ship now looks like an X-Wing fighter or something.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

I wanted to see a Star Trek with an A-list cast, an A-list production design, a strong focus on character, and set during the Technicolor, art-deco years of TOS. . . What surprises me everytime I watch TOS is just how narrow-thin the "neck" of the Enterprise was, and just how long and spindly the 'arms' were that attached the warp nacelles to the secondary hull.

"Art deco" is a term applied to the modernistic architecture, industrial design and graphic design of the 1930s. New York's Chrysler Building is a good example. What does that have to do with Trek TOS?

The original Enterprise is a classic, graceful, elegantly proportioned, beautiful design. With a little imagination, the warp nacelles atop those tall, slender pylons evoke images of sails and masts. The JJ-prise looks like the saucer was lifted straight from the Refit/Enterprise A, and the secondary hull and warp engines were redesigned by Harley J. Earl when he was drunk. In one word: FUGLY.

YMMV.

Personally, I like the new design, so though you consider it Fugly, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

The reasons for having to change it, as far as I can see, are as follows:

1. The TOS Enterprise was designed in the 1960s, and though beautiful and elegant, would not match with more modern designs for the rest of the movie that were absolutely required. The TMP Enterprise was redesigned for exactly the same reason.

2. Modifying the TOS Enterprise in small ways would have been seen as "unimaginateve" in all likelyhood, and since this was supposed to be a Reboot in many ways to kick-start "the franchise", it was necessary to make more daring changes.

3. Again with the Reboot, it had to look COOL. Adding a few greebles to the TOS design would not be "cool" to a more general audience, who had to be enticed into theaters for the movie to be viable. Whether you like it or not, lets not kid ourselves into thinking that the TOS design, or a slight variant of it, would appeal to the uninitiated. If they saw the TOS design in previews, they would have laughed it out of the theaters, and the movie would have been a failure.

4. Scale. For the Enterprise to be the impressive starship on screen, it had to seem huge on screen. It had to be big to impress, and the TOS design would not have allowed for this to occur convincingly.

Asking why to the Nth degree will lead to an inability to answer the question beyond a certain point. This is because creative decisions such as how much of a redesign is necessary depends very much on intuition, and not a concrete, provable methodology.

I have no doubt that a great design could be created that would be much closer to the TOS Enterprise, but the truth is, it would likely not have worked well in relation to the rest of the movie's designs, not as a reboot (in a sense) of Star Trek.

 

[TIN_MAN]

What strikes me as odd, is that the "new" design isn't that original at all. They basically took Gabe Koerner's design and then morphed it out of all proportion, (so they wouldn't get sued?). JJ should have just hired Gabe and used his design as is, and we'd be better off IMHO, as I like Gabe's version (except for the color) over what we got.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

What strikes me as odd, is that the "new" design isn't that original at all. They basically took Gabe Koerner's design and then morphed it out of all proportion, (so they wouldn't get sued?). JJ should have just hired Gabe and used his design as is, and we'd be better off IMHO, as I like Gabe's version (except for the color) over what we got.

Your personal preference notwithstanding, I see very little in Gabe's design that made it into the Church design.

The Nacelle's have some similarities though.

Truth be told, there was a lot from the TMP Enterprise that made it into the movie's design, such as the windows on the Primary Hull, and some of the markings, and certain surface details, such as those T shapes on the primary hull came from the TOS incarnation.

The round nacelles idea, including the spinning collectors at the front, are also from TOS.

But really, it was meant to be sportier in some ways, sleeker, so that it looks more subliminally modern than the TOS design.

This partially contrasts with the Kelvin design, which was much more blocky and simplistic, and actually a bit more like TOS.

 

[Agenda]

Trust me, guys, the 'difference' is in the eyes of Trekkies alone.

 

[Cyke101]

Trust me, guys, the 'difference' is in the eyes of Trekkies alone.

This. The JJprise is familiar enough that people who left Trek or only had a passing acquaintance with the franchise still came to watch the movie.

 

[CaptainStoner]

It seems that a lot of folks who dislike post-TOS Enterprises dislike them all, as the Scotty quote goes. So there was no pleasing that segment with anything other than a TOS model with higher detail for the big screen. And half of them would have hated the higher detail.
Then a lot of folks like all the incarnations. I'm one of those, and I especially like the D, as well as the other classes of ships - Excelsior, Oberth, Reliant, etc. Loved the Ambassador class Enterprise-C, which the new one perhaps most closely resembles (of the on-screen enterprises)
I hadn't noticed that the nuEnterprise was that hugely scaled up, but its been a while since seeing the film. Did they scale it up larger than the D?

As to the question of why - I would say because it was logical to redesign it some. They redesigned the uniforms, the bridge, the brewery *ahem* engineering. It was only natural to have a new take on the ship as well.
Sure, call her fugly if you must, to each his own. One thing I liked about the new Enterprise was that it has some character on screen.

I actually had bigger issue with JJ's turning phasers into blaster cannons than the ship proportions. The old phasers were...a more elegant weapon, from a more civilzed age. (or timeline)

 

[Kelso]

The new one makes a better toy.

 

[Aragorn]

Then a lot of folks like all the incarnations. I'm one of those, and I especially like the D, as well as the other classes of ships - Excelsior, Oberth, Reliant, etc. Loved the Ambassador class Enterprise-C, which the new one perhaps most closely resembles (of the on-screen enterprises)

Since it was way before the internet I didn't know of many Trekkies back then... didn't people hate the Excelsior design originally but then liked it when Sulu got to be the captain?

Or am I just thinking of how Scotty thought the Excelsior design was a bucket of bolts but then thought it was a damn fine ship when one was named the Enterprise B?

 

[Sabataage]

"Art deco" is a term applied to the modernistic architecture, industrial design and graphic design of the 1930s. New York's Chrysler Building is a good example. What does that have to do with Trek TOS?

Okay, how about "Zeerust" then?

P.S. This article is also quite relevant. It even namedrops "art deco" as the inpiration for what they thought the World of Tommorow would look like. Admittedly Roddenberry tried to avert this where ever he could. I remember reading that he instructed the model maker not to put fins on it.

 

[Omega_Glory]

Also: If people can deal with new people playing Kirk and co, why can't people cope with a new CG 'playing' the Enterprise? It's really no different.

To be sure, most of the new actors are very close matches of the originals, perhaps with the exception of Kirk himself...

...Just like most of the new ships are very close matches of what we'd expect from TOS, perhaps with the exception of the Enterprise herself.

Timo Saloniemi

I think the term, very close, is a bit strong for either the characters or the new ships.

The ships have a little resemblance to the ships from Star Trek TMP thru Trek VI, but just on the exterior. The interiors are wildly different, both on the supposed "prime timeline" ship and the "altered timeline" ships.

As far as the actors go, the only two that were even close matches to the originals were Urban and Cho. Quinto was reasonable, but the rest were a far cry from the originals or the orginal characters.

As far as the intial question on why JJ had to mess with the ship, the fact is that he (and Paramount) wanted to change Star Trek into a show for a younger, less mature, less attentive audience than the original concept was marketed at. Thats where the $$$ is.

 

[Aragorn]

Well look who just took a clearly thought out and articulate shot at all of you who think differently than he does regarding the ship.

 

[Ihlecreations]

I do believe if Abrams had just used the TOS E, there would have been just as many complaints. Now as someone who has a degree in industrial design I can say a redesign was absolutely necessary. Now there are some aspects of the new ship that seem off balance to me but as a whole it does exactly what the makers of the film wanted it to do. It had to be new, with a modern design ethic, yet be instantly recognizable, and it does both perfectly. I can argue the details of the design till I am blue in the face but it doesn't matter because, (and I hate to say it but this goes for all of us), I(we) are not the people making the film, nor do we own Star Trek as a whole. We are fans, and while the new design might turn some off it will undoubtably turn just as many or more on. And in the movie biz as long as there are more people buying tickets than not, majority rules. If Star Trek had been a flop I am quite sure there would be more than a few execs out there trying to figure out why. And then the opinions stated here about the design of the new ship might fall on some more tuned in ears. Hope this thread keeps going so I can discuss some of the design elements I think work and those that don't.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Also: If people can deal with new people playing Kirk and co, why can't people cope with a new CG 'playing' the Enterprise? It's really no different.

To be sure, most of the new actors are very close matches of the originals, perhaps with the exception of Kirk himself...

...Just like most of the new ships are very close matches of what we'd expect from TOS, perhaps with the exception of the Enterprise herself.

Timo Saloniemi

I think the term, very close, is a bit strong for either the characters or the new ships.

The ships have a little resemblance to the ships from Star Trek TMP thru Trek VI, but just on the exterior. The interiors are wildly different, both on the supposed "prime timeline" ship and the "altered timeline" ships.

As far as the actors go, the only two that were even close matches to the originals were Urban and Cho. Quinto was reasonable, but the rest were a far cry from the originals or the orginal characters.

As far as the intial question on why JJ had to mess with the ship, the fact is that he (and Paramount) wanted to change Star Trek into a show for a younger, less mature, less attentive audience than the original concept was marketed at. Thats where the $$$ is.

This is a Star Trek ship

That all the "look" you need for the public to think "Star Trek".

As for the actors, a physical resemblance to the previous cast is the last thing the casting people should look for. Cho probably looks less like Takei than Yelchin looks like Koenig.