Why do they dismantle or destroy old Star Trek bridges?
- Thread starter Adam La Forge
- Start date
Lots of bits of Paramount sets (and costumes and props) were auctioned off by “It’s a Wrap!” It took them about three years on eBay, putting up tens of items every week.
When TOS ended, the lifesized Galileo shuttlecraft was donated to a children’s playground, where the wooden panels rotted away over decades - and it was only recently restored to museum quality and displayed, but how much of it is original material after such massive restoration?
Consider that sets of Star Trek walls, consoles and corridors are nailed over support beams that are raw and unfinished. With splinters and stray nails. Not built with closeness to the general public in mind. To temporarily install an actual set at a fan event, without it falling over, or causing angst to the hotel owners who have to find a space big enough to stand it in. And security to keep souvenir hunters from after-hours pilfering…
Never gonna fly.
Set pieces used for public access photography events have usually been purposely built (ie. not screen-used) to make them safer to be around, to stand upright, to dismantle…
When TOS ended, the lifesized Galileo shuttlecraft was donated to a children’s playground, where the wooden panels rotted away over decades - and it was only recently restored to museum quality and displayed, but how much of it is original material after such massive restoration?
Consider that sets of Star Trek walls, consoles and corridors are nailed over support beams that are raw and unfinished. With splinters and stray nails. Not built with closeness to the general public in mind. To temporarily install an actual set at a fan event, without it falling over, or causing angst to the hotel owners who have to find a space big enough to stand it in. And security to keep souvenir hunters from after-hours pilfering…
Never gonna fly.
Set pieces used for public access photography events have usually been purposely built (ie. not screen-used) to make them safer to be around, to stand upright, to dismantle…
In fact season 3 of Picard not only proved that rebuilding the classic sets on a series budget is totally doable, but also that it might be more convenient than repurposing some already available: they tried to use a TNG bridge set that had been built for conventions but realised that it was not practical due to the amount of reworking necessary to match the real one and because, being built for general public use, it was much heavier than they wanted.
When they rebuilt the Enterprise-D set I do wonder if they reused the old wooden rail that made up Worf's station. That seemed like something that would be hard to duplicate. I mean even if you wanted to destroy the TNG bridge I would think someone would at least want to preserve that part of the bridge. Well that and maybe the ops and helm chairs.
AFAIK they rebuilt everything from scratch bar possibly a couple of small things. The fact that they managed to duplicate the wood pattern on the arch is incredible.
Did you watch the Ready Room with Wil Wheaton episode where they showed the rebuilding of it? Yes, the shape is hard to do (they mentioned it being a challenge a bit), but not impossible. The wooden rail from TNG was discarded a long time ago, termite food in a dump somewhere outside LA.
"Why do they destroy or dismantle Star Trek bridges?"
Red Hot Chili Peppers said it (or should I say sang it?) best: "Space may be the final frontier, but it's made in a Hollywood basement!"
Red Hot Chili Peppers said it (or should I say sang it?) best: "Space may be the final frontier, but it's made in a Hollywood basement!"
I didn't see that. The part of the old one being in some dump somewhere is a kind of a sad image but likely true. I find stuff like that to be sad. I mean just think of it. Johnny 5 is probably all rusted and laying around in garbage or even buried with other garbage underground as we type/read.
I’m sure that there were multiple Jonny 5 anyway.
By the way, I saw a documentary showing how most of Herbie the Love Bug cars are together in the same garage and that kinda brought me joy.
By the way, I saw a documentary showing how most of Herbie the Love Bug cars are together in the same garage and that kinda brought me joy.
It probably is, my wife's friend works in Hollywood, she knows one of those generically handsome actors that stars in those productions. He says they film a bunch of them, one after the other, up in Canada.
Oh, I'm sure of it. Depending on what's needed for them, there would have to be different versions made for different purposes, ie closeup shots, action shots, etc. This video explains part of it.
People want lots of things. It comes down to money and no one has an answer for that.
So now you want the studio to just exploit fans to make up for the costs. Great.
If they're not getting paid for the work they're doing, it's 100% exploitation.
But it's not so much work as its is someone coming to somebodies place to get free stuff. It is sort of like putting a old couch out next to the road and someone stopping by and asking you if they can take it. And you saying that is okay. Then they do the work of loading it up on their truck. Sure that might help you out a little by getting ride of a old couch you don't want but the people who take it are not being exploited. They just got a new couch for free.
Watch enough Hammer horror films back to back and you start to recognize lots of sets, furnishings, and locations. The same staircase or drawbridge will pop up in Castle Dracula, Dr. Frankenstein's mansion, or the Tsar's palace in RASPUTIN: THE MAD MONK. Ditto the same lonely wooded crossroad, desolate cemetery, ornate fountain, etc.
(For awhile there, Hammer owned a large country estate where they filmed most of their movies; hence, the same meadows, streams, and courtyards popping up over and over again in different contexts.)
Love doesn't come without money though. There's always some expense involved. And sometimes that expense might be more than it seems on the surface.
Similar threads
