Andrew Probert and Rick Sternbach: The New Enterprise

[ConRefit79]

Like many here, I was disappointed by the first photo I saw of the new Enterprise. I'm hoping other views will make it more appealing.

BTW - Mr. Probert, I just have to say, the refit Enterprise from TMP is my all time favorite Enterprise.

 

[JuanBolio]

I seems like the Enterprise is being built in San Francisco after all. From Abrams:

Abrams began with the initial scenes of a young Kirk riding in the Corvette and on the motorbike. "The idea with the trailer was to start with something unexpected and Earth-bound and then thrust you into the world of Trek. The scenes on Earth were important to feel a sense of future but also a real sense of now as well. Star Wars is a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away but Star Trek is our future, so it's important that we not feel disconnected from that. There are a couple of sequences that take place in Iowa and some in San Francisco and it was just important that the movie feel connected to familiar terrain before it became about things that you more might expect."

 

[Carbon Unit]

You know, even though the idea of the Enterprise being built on the ground and, heaven forbid, actually taking off and flying into space screams "NO NO NO NO" to me, is there any real reason why it couldn't be done? This is science fiction set in the 23rd century, after all. While all this talk about stress requirements and so on is very reasonable, isn't it also reasonable that the Enterprise, designed to withstand unbelievable stresses, could realistically blast off from the surface somehow?

Is there anything said on-screen that ever specifically prohibited the TOS Enterprise from flying through an atmosphere? I'm being devil's advocate here.

 

[JuanBolio]

which may be why NASA didn't build the International Space Station on the ground.

No, it was built on the ground then shipped into space and assembled. Trying to built something from the keel up in space would be insanely difficult and dangerous. The assembly seen in the trailer may be part of a systems integration test before the ship is disassembled and boosted into orbit for final assembly and finalization. Unless we see it take off in one piece, there's no reason to think otherwise.

And everyone familiar with Star Trek knows Kirk is from Iowa but the Starship Enterprise was begun in the Naval Shipyards, San Francisco.

See my previous post.

 

[ConRefit79]

I'm sure they have anti-gravity generators, so they won't need to blast it into space like the Space Shuttle.

 

[JuanBolio]

I'm sure they have anti-gravity generators, so they won't need to blast it into space like the Space Shuttle.

True. The implications of firing an impulse engine in an atmosphere - especially anywhere near a city - are too nightmarish to contemplate.

 

[trevanian]

EDIT: I originally aimed this at Rick, but I'll ask trevanian too.

What do you think of the extensive use of barcode scanners? Maybe the style is techno-supermarket?

I thought they were just fancied up joysticks, so anybody can 'pull a riker' when it comes time to turn the ship in a hurry. Either that or badly-designed handholds.

I'm hoping to get an article on this; if so, I'll try to talk to the art director, because I get the idea this is like TMP to some degree, that the art director is inflicting a lot of stuff on the cinematographer (either that or Abrams is.)

 

[ACE]

I'm curious as to why there are desk lamps from Costco and Giant Eagle self-checkout scanners all over the bridge.

Could they have picked something more uncomfortable for the captain's chair?

Not to mention the roll of gaffer's tape somebody left on the helm.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

As bad as the design looking like Galaxy Quest is. The fact that all the stations and the joysticks on the helm for example look not like tech and futuristic, but look like toys built for little kids is really the worst part of the whole thing.

Joysticks aren't necessary "toylike" or doofy looking -- the F-16, F-22, and a number of other modern fighters use them -- and they work quite well. They look pretty bad-ass. Of course they're not huge, white with a positively gigantic red button on them and look like I got them out of a toy-store in the local mall either...

The fact the floor's tiling happens to look like my neighbors kitchen doesn't help either...

 

[trevanian]

I can't get over how the lights above the rear stations seem to shine directly into operator's eyes.

That, coupled with the floor, is guaranteed eyestrain for the crew ... maybe for the audience too.

 

[ancient]

The designer certainly has a hard-on for bright little round lights. The things are everywhere, even in the corridors. At least they're in the cieling there. I'm a little confused by the corridors though, they look like a cheap set built on a dance studio or something. It looks like they painted a bunch of old TV screens white and stuck them on the walls. What purpose are those things supposed to serve? Trek corridors have always been pretty minimalist and functional. Those things don't look like access panels. They look like packed snow.

I think the overall design of the corridors is Ok, but like the other ENT interiors from the trailer once you pause it and really look at it, it just doesn't look right. I think they went too arty with the interiors.

The exterior is actually a pretty tame redesign by comparison. Anyway, I doubt these will bother me during the movie itself, but they do seem to be the result of a hyperactive designer.

 

[Captain X]

The assembly seen in the trailer may be part of a systems integration test before the ship is disassembled and boosted into orbit for final assembly and finalization. Unless we see it take off in one piece, there's no reason to think otherwise.

You're suggesting that they built an entire ship that large on the ground, then cut it all apart so they could haul it into space and reconstruct it? That would be a lot of work and there wouldn't be much if any point to it.

 

[Psion]

I don't even think it's "arty", Ancient. I think it looks junky. Say what you will about the quality of Trek writing over the last fifteen years, their set-designs have been beautiful and realistic.

These sets just don't look realistic at all.

 

[JuanBolio]

The assembly seen in the trailer may be part of a systems integration test before the ship is disassembled and boosted into orbit for final assembly and finalization. Unless we see it take off in one piece, there's no reason to think otherwise.

You're suggesting that they built an entire ship that large on the ground, then cut it all apart so they could haul it into space and reconstruct it? That would be a lot of work and there wouldn't be much if any point to it.

Cut it? No. Its a modular design - its built to come apart. The point would be to make sure the systems work together properly before doing the hard and dangerous work in space.

I don't even think it's "arty", Ancient. I think it looks junky. Say what you will about the quality of Trek writing over the last fifteen years, their set-designs have been beautiful and realistic.

These sets just don't look realistic at all.

I saw very little that struck me as "realistic" in 24th century Trek.

 

[Captain_Amasov]

The designer certainly has a hard-on for bright little round lights. The things are everywhere, even in the corridors.

That reminds me of this:

"Blinkies It seems every technical device in Star Trek incorporates a flashing light. There is nothing wrong with an LED (or a future equivalent of an LED) to indicate the operation mode or status of a device, especially if it is a hand-held scanner or jammer. But the prop designers go too far with this habit and build in blinking LEDs just everywhere even if there is absolutely no need for such an indicator. The silly culmination of this habit is in VOY: "Drive" where the Doctor is playing with blinking golf balls."

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies/cliches1.htm

 

[USS KG5]

You're suggesting that they built an entire ship that large on the ground, then cut it all apart so they could haul it into space and reconstruct it? That would be a lot of work and there wouldn't be much if any point to it.

Cut it? No. Its a modular design - its built to come apart. The point would be to make sure the systems work together properly before doing the hard and dangerous work in space.

What exactly is the issue everyone has with this ship being built on the ground, and, ya know, flying away? Bearing in mind they have the technology to: -

1. Fly much much faster than light.
2. Translate any language almost instantly.
3. Transport from place to place over thousands of miles as a regular form of transport.
4. Force fields.
5. Ray guns.
6. Tractor beams....

I could go on - and amongst all this they do not have the technology to build a ship on the ground and have it take off without falling to bits?

 

[Probert]

On the Bridge-slash-Revlon commercial set, you're absolutely right about all those round BRIGHT lights in everyones' face. There was none of that on the 'D', (except for those bad corridor deck-level under-lights) and you will never find them in a real setting, like a contemporary submarine control room for instance. And what's up with those multiple play-station positions that one red-shirt is using in the back ground? Staying with the lighting frenzy, it looks like the whole damn floor behind con & ops is one huge light box. And then, to top it all off, each work station has their own task light??? WHY? Aren't the controls bright enough by themselves? And why is that woman holding a pencil? Yeah, love the gaffer's (duck) tape roll. The captain's seat?... hemorrhoid heaven, the way it drops down like that. Those 'joysticks' are too far to reach, so I don't think that's what they are, but maybe they're some sort of video/com units? As for the uncarpeted floors,... maybe they're setting us up for comic relief on floor-waxing day.

Now let's enjoy those shuttles I'd mentioned earlier.

Aside from those sad jet engines and useless winglets,... It seems they still use bolts (red circles) 300 years from now, not to mention their door/hatch doesn't seem to require a deck-level seal.

I can't find a Production Designer name attached to this film, with most of the design credit going to Ryan Church and John Eaves while the moves-too-fast over-the-top CG aliens were designed by the Cloverfield monster guy: Neville page.

*Sigh*
Andrew-

 

[Timo]

Hmm... Perhaps the lights (esp. from the floor) are residual radiation from equipment that has not yet been properly covered by carpeting and vanity panels?

As for bolts being used in the 23rd century, that's a given: we did see our share of wrenches in TOS!

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Could they have picked something more uncomfortable for the captain's chair?

Well yeah, they could have gone with Kirk's original one. Which this one resembles in important respects anyway.

Well, for one, the original chair had cushions. The one looks like it has foam or something.

Nope, the cushions and padding are about the same thickness, and very similar in shape, covered in both instances by black vinyl.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Don't get me wrong, if you look around and find the arguments I've gotten into with Dennis Bailey...

Whoa, I thought we just argued about our hairlines?