star trek jj abrams enterprise

Star Trek: 10 Secrets Of The Kelvin Enterprise You Need To Know

An inside look at Star Trek’s most ample nacelles.

If fictional spaceships can be controversial, then the USS Enterprise of JJ Abrams' Kelvin Timeline is probably the most hotly debated starship in cinema. First appearing in the critically acclaimed and commercially successful Star Trek (2009), this USS Enterprise has some of Hollywood's best minds behind her construction – and yet she continues to be hated by a huge chunk of the fanbase.

Designed by Ryan Church and Scott Chambliss, and brought to life by Industrial Light & Magic, the Kelvin Timeline USS Enterprise was intended to be the "hotrod" starship the Star Trek Universe hadn't seen before. With her inflated scale, "ample" warp nacelles, and beautiful (if blindingly lit) interiors, the Kelvin Enterprise was poised to lead Star Trek to box office glory... only to have her service and her franchise cut short with 2016's Star Trek Beyond.

But what do we know about the Kelvin Timeline USS Enterprise? With a total of zero technical manuals and a film series less interested in the nitty-gritty details than its predecessors, there's surprisingly little information about this alternate reality Constitution-class starship.

We've delved deep into behind the scenes stories, expanded universe tales, and scoured the three films for those tiny details that shed some lens flare-light on the secrets of the Kelvin Timeline's USS Enterprise.

10. Ample Everything

The world got its first look at JJ Abrams' "reimagined" USS Enterprise when the first teaser trailer for Star Trek premiered in theaters on January 18, 2008 – over a year before the film was released.

This teaser was just that, a teaser, containing no footage from the movie itself but a sequence of visual effects shots of the new USS Enterprise under construction on Earth. These unique VFX shots were created specifically for the teaser and featured construction cranes and scaffolding surrounding the Enterprise, as well as workers walking on her hull.

Of course eagle eyed fans soon noted that by comparing the heights of the workers standing on the ship's hull, the evidence indicated that the new Enterprise was massive in scale compared to her predecessors.

According to the producers, the new Enterprise was 2,380 feet long, more than twice the size of Kirk's ship from Star Trek: The Original Series. The ship was even larger than the Galaxy-class USS Enterprise-D from Star Trek: The Next Generation, a vessel supposedly built over 100 years later.

So why was the ship so big? Well, according to the VFX artists, it really just came down to grandeur. When early visual effects began to arrive featuring the ship at a size comparable to that of the TOS Enterprise, director JJ Abrams felt it lacked the big screen presence he was looking for and asked that it be scaled up... considerably.

Artifacts of the smaller Enterprise can be found sprinkled throughout the first Star Trek reboot film, notably during the escape pod ejection scene, but by the time of Star Trek Into Darkness, the digital model was fully retrofitted to reflect the larger scale.

That large scale, by the way, would go on to become the norm in the Star Trek franchise. In 2017, Star Trek: Discovery premiered and featured the USS Discovery clocking in at 2,462 feet (despite its pre-TOS era) and when that series introduced its own version of the Enterprise, that ship was inflated in size too.

I played Shipyard Bar Patron (Uncredited) in Star Trek (2009).

USS Enterprise (NCC-1701 alternate reality)

• View history

The USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) was a 23rd century Federation Constitution -class starship operated by Starfleet . Launched in 2258 , the vessel was officially made the Federation flagship , and the first Federation starship to bear the name Enterprise . ( Star Trek ; Star Trek Beyond )

In 2260 , the Enterprise became the first starship assigned by the Federation to undergo a five-year exploration mission of uncharted deep space . ( Star Trek Into Darkness )

After nearly five years of service, the Enterprise was destroyed during the battle over the planet Altamid in 2263 , when it was attacked by Krall and his Swarm ships . It was soon replaced by the newly-built USS Enterprise -A . ( Star Trek Beyond )

• 2.1 Construction
• 2.2 Maiden voyage
• 2.4 Going after "John Harrison"
• 2.5.1 Mission to Teenax
• 2.5.2 Final voyage
• 3.1 Christopher Pike's command crew
• 3.2 James T. Kirk's command crew
• 4.1 Appearances
• 4.2 Background information
• 4.3 Apocrypha
• 4.4 External links

Lineage [ ]

Service history [ ], construction [ ].

The Enterprise under construction in Iowa

The Enterprise was under construction around 2255 at the Riverside Shipyard , in Iowa , and launched into service from the San Francisco Fleet Yards , Earth . ( Star Trek )

During its construction, a piece of the Enterprise NX-01 was used as it was the previous ship to bear the name. ( SNW : " Those Old Scientists ")

Maiden voyage [ ]

The Enterprise ready for launch

In 2258 , the ship's planned maiden voyage, under the command of Christopher Pike , was brought forward after Earth received a distress call from Vulcan while the bulk of the fleet was engaged in the Laurentian system . As a result, the Enterprise was crewed primarily by Starfleet Academy cadets.

The Enterprise departs spacedock

The ship launched from Starbase 1 with seven other starships to respond to the call, including the USS Farragut , the USS Truman , and the USS Hood . However, its departure was delayed because helmsman Hikaru Sulu forgot to disengage the external inertial dampener , which actually saved the ship after it arrived shortly after the rescue fleet had been destroyed by the Romulan mining ship Narada .

The Enterprise warps into Nero's mess

The Enterprise proved to be no match for the technologically-advanced missiles of the Narada . Fortunately, Nero recognized the Enterprise as the vessel that Spock served on. He chose not to destroy the Enterprise in order to allow Spock to see the destruction of Vulcan.

Enterprise found that it was unable to contact Starfleet or to begin evacuating the inhabitants of Vulcan, as the Narada 's drill platform , while in operation, prevented communications and transporter use. Despite the sabotage of the drill platform, Nero launched a container of red matter into the planet's core, which created a singularity that caused Vulcan to implode, killing all but about ten thousand Vulcans.

Following the destruction of Vulcan and the capture of Captain Pike, Acting Captain Spock intended to take the Enterprise to rendezvous with the rest of the fleet at the Laurentian system, but acting First Officer James T. Kirk thought it better to attempt to stop Nero first. A fight ensued, and Spock then marooned Kirk for mutiny on Delta Vega , but Kirk managed to beam back on board with the help of another Spock and Montgomery Scott . Spock was forced to resign his command to Kirk according to Regulation 619 , and the Enterprise reversed course in an attempt to intercept the Narada before it could strike Earth.

The Enterprise rises above Titan

Emerging from warp in the atmosphere of Titan , the Enterprise hid from the Narada 's sensors using the magnetic distortion of Saturn 's rings, while beaming Spock and Kirk aboard the Romulan ship before its drill could be activated. However, the duo could not be rescued as the drill was turned on shortly after their arrival. Kirk then rescued Pike, while Spock confiscated the Jellyfish and used it to destroy the drill.

The Enterprise fires on the Narada 's missiles

Spock then warped out of the system, with Nero pursuing. Spock set a collision course, and Nero launched his remaining missiles to defend the Narada . Unexpectedly, the Enterprise then warped in, firing phasers full spread, destroying the missiles, and allowing Spock to continue. Shortly before impact, Spock, Kirk, and Pike were beamed out by Scott onto the Enterprise .

The Enterprise being pulled into the black hole

The impact ignited the red matter aboard the Jellyfish , creating a black hole which caused the Narada to be stuck. When Kirk offered assistance, Nero refused, saying that " he would suffer the death of Romulus a thousand times, " and that " he would rather die in agony than receive the Enterprise 's assistance. "

Kirk acknowledged the refusal and the Enterprise brought all her phasers and photon torpedoes to bear on the Narada , firing on the ship and blasting it to pieces, causing the massive ship to collapse and be pulled into the black hole. During the attempt from escaping the black hole’s gravity, the Enterprise was nearly pulled into the black hole as well, even through warp. However, the ship was saved when the ship's warp core was ejected and detonated; the resulting shock wave propelled the Enterprise to safety.

Following the successful mission of the Enterprise , Pike was promoted to admiral and Kirk was assigned to command the Enterprise as his relief. Kirk subsequently chose Spock as his first officer. ( Star Trek )

Enterprise resurfacing on Nibiru

In 2259 , the Enterprise was sent to survey the planet Nibiru when the crew discovered a volcanic eruption would render the primitive Nibirans extinct. Kirk parked the Enterprise underwater, despite Scott's protests,ultimately forcing Kirk to expose the ship to the natives in order to transport Spock out of the volcano before the cold fusion device he placed detonated.

After appearing to the natives, in violation of the Prime Directive , the Nibirans drew a sketch of the Enterprise on the ground and began to worship the ship as a deity. Returning to Earth, Kirk was demoted, but Pike convinced Admiral Alexander Marcus to let him appoint Kirk as his first officer.

Going after "John Harrison" [ ]

The Enterprise departs Starbase 1

That evening, the rogue agent John Harrison attacked Starfleet Headquarters to assassinate Marcus, but killed Pike instead. Marcus gave a vengeful Kirk permission to take the Enterprise to Qo'noS where Harrison had fled, and fire on his location with 72 advanced long-range torpedoes . Chief Engineer Scott protested the loading of the photon torpedoes aboard Enterprise without his chance to examine them, offering his resignation, which Kirk accepted. Chekov was appointed as Scott's replacement.

Enterprise and Vengeance come face to face

Kirk found Harrison on Qo'noS and had him brought to the brig . Harrison was reticent about his motives, but suggested Kirk examine the torpedoes Marcus gave him, and also gave him a set of coordinates , which the captain sent to Scott to investigate.

Marcus's daughter Carol and McCoy opened up a torpedo and discovered it held a man in cryogenic stasis . Harrison revealed he was Khan Noonien Singh and the torpedoes held his fellow Augments , with whom Marcus had threatened him into cooperation. Marcus arrived in the USS Vengeance and demanded Kirk hand over Khan, but Kirk refused, intending to expose the conspiracy by bringing Khan to trial on Earth.

The USS Vengeance fires on the USS Enterprise

The Vengeance caught up with the Enterprise at warp and fired on it, halting it as it arrived just outside Earth . Marcus beamed up his daughter before preparing to wipe out all other witnesses to his plot, but Scott, who had sneaked aboard the Vengeance at the coordinates given by Khan, temporarily deactivated its weapons. Kirk and Khan donned thruster suits to commandeer the Vengeance , while Spock ordered McCoy to remove the cryo tubes from the torpedoes.

The crippled Enterprise spiraling down to Earth

Aboard the Vengeance , Khan killed Admiral Marcus and demanded Spock hand over the torpedoes in exchange for Kirk, Scott, and Carol and the safety of the Enterprise . Spock, knowing Khan would renege on letting the Enterprise survive, set the transported torpedoes to detonate in the Vengeance 's cargo bay. The damage inflicted caused both ships to hurtle to Earth: the Vengeance 's engines were compromised while the Enterprise 's warp core became misaligned, causing loss of power and propulsion. As the ship plummeted toward Earth, Kirk realigned the ship’s warp core despite Scott’s warning about the high radiation levels.

The five-year mission [ ]

The Enterprise 's refitted impulse engine and nacelle fins

In 2260 , following nearly a year of repairs, the Enterprise was rechristened and refitted to become the first starship to embark on a five-year mission of uncharted deep space exploration. ( Star Trek Into Darkness )

During its five year mission, the Enterprise made a stop at Thasus and picked up a supply of Saurian brandy . ( Star Trek Beyond )

Mission to Teenax [ ]

In 2263 –nearly three years into its five-year mission–the Enterprise visited the planet Teenax , where Captain Kirk was tasked with brokering peace between the Teenaxi and the Fibonans . Following that failed assignment, the Enterprise traveled to Starbase Yorktown for resupply. ( Star Trek Beyond )

Final voyage [ ]

The Enterprise at Starbase Yorktown in 2263

Soon after docking at Yorktown, the Enterprise was ordered to traverse the Necro Cloud to rescue Kalara 's crew, allegedly stranded on the planet Altamid . Despite the navigational difficulties presented by the cloud, the Enterprise was equipped with the most advanced navigational sensors and emerged from the nebula in orbit of Altamid–immediately coming under attack by Swarm ships commanded by the tyrant Krall .

The Enterprise in the Necro Cloud

The Enterprise was unable to handle this style of attack, the ship's phasers having minimal to no effect against the swarm, the photon torpedoes proving to be ineffective, and the shields unable to identify the assaulting ships as threats, leaving them open to attack.

The first assault destroyed the Enterprise 's phasers and main deflector dish and, as the ship attempted to warp back to the nebula, the swarm severed its warp nacelles . The ship was then boarded by Krall's drone soldiers and his henchman Manas , searching the ship for an artifact known as the Abronath and killing many Enterprise crew members.

Krall's swarm overwhelms the Enterprise

As Lieutenant Sulu attempted to pilot the Enterprise away from Altamid at impulse speed, Krall ordered yet another assault on the ship, this time severing the primary hull from the secondary hull . With the Enterprise critically damaged, Captain Kirk ordered all hands to evacuate and the ship's escape pods were launched. However, Krall's ships captured the pods and carried them to the surface of Altamid.

The crew abandons ship from the secondary hull of the Enterprise

The remains of the secondary hull drawing power from the impulse engines prevented the saucer from escaping until Lieutenant Uhura successfully separated the ship. However, the Enterprise had fallen into the planet's gravity well and even with impulse engines restored, could not escape. With the Abronath safely hidden away, Kirk ordered the last of his crew to man their Kelvin pods and abandon ship. The primary hull then fell out of orbit and entered Altamid's atmosphere, crash-landing to a stop at an angle.

Kirk and Chekov return to the wreck of the Enterprise

With the crew scattered on Altamid, Kirk decided to return to the wreckage of the Enterprise and attempt to use her scanning systems to locate the crew. Kirk, Chekov, and Kalara boarded the ship through a hole in the hull and returned to the ruined bridge, where Chekov was able to restore power to the engineering console and scanning systems. Kirk took Kalara to supposedly retrieve the Abronath, at which point Kalara called Krall to report. Unknown to Kalara, Kirk suspected the double-cross and had Chekov use the Enterprise 's scanners to track Kalara's call back to Krall's base.

The saucer of the Enterprise burns on Altamid

After the deception was revealed, Kalara and a few of Krall's drones chased Kirk and Chekov through the wreckage of the Enterprise , ultimately cornering them against one of the thrusters . Discovering the ship's thrusters to still be primed, Kirk used a phaser blast to ignite them, causing the Enterprise to flip over.

As the ship flipped, Kirk and Chekov were able to use the distraction to escape by shooting out the bridge window and sliding down the saucer. The saucer flipped upside down and crashed to the forest below, killing Kalara, who was underneath it. Following the flip, the wrecked saucer was left upside down on the forest floor of Altamid, burning.

After Kalara's death, Krall's men searched the wreckage of the saucer for the Abronath but were unable to locate it. They retrieved the ship's logs while aboard the information in which inspired Krall to threaten Sulu to find the Abronath. The Enterprise crew, once reunited, repaired the USS Franklin to escape and chase Krall, abandoning the wreckage of the Enterprise on Altamid.

After Krall's defeat, the surviving members of the Enterprise crew made a toast to their fallen ship and were later reassigned to a new starship, the USS Enterprise -A , and continued their mission of exploration. ( Star Trek Beyond )

Command crew [ ]

Christopher pike's command crew [ ].

Pike in command

• Christopher Pike ( 2258 , 2259 )
• Spock (2258) (acting)
• Spock (2258)
• James T. Kirk (2258, 2259) (acting, later promoted)
• Olson (2258)
• Puri (2258)
• Leonard McCoy (2258)
• McKenna (2258)
• Hikaru Sulu (2258)
• Pavel Chekov (2258)
• Hannity (2258)
• Hawkins (2258)
• Nyota Uhura (2258)

James T. Kirk's command crew [ ]

Kirk in command

The Enterprise crew in 2263

• James T. Kirk (2258– 2263 ) (acting, later promoted)
• Hikaru Sulu (2259) (acting)
• Spock (2259) (acting)
• Spock (2258–2263)
• Montgomery Scott (2258–2263)
• Pavel Chekov (2259) (acting)
• Hikaru Sulu (2259)
• Leonard McCoy (2258–2263)
• Hikaru Sulu (2258–2263)
• Pavel Chekov (2258–2263)
• Darwin (2259) (acting)
• Nyota Uhura (2258–2263)
• Brackett (2259)
• Froman (2258– 2260s )
• Spock (2258-2263)
• 0718 (2259–2260s)
• Carol Marcus (2259–2260s)

See also: USS Enterprise personnel (alternate reality)

Appendices [ ]

Appearances [ ].

• Star Trek (First appearance)
• Star Trek Into Darkness
• Star Trek Beyond

Background information [ ]

In the script of Star Trek , the Enterprise , in its ready-for-launch condition, was referred to as "miraculous" and "the queen of the fleet". At the end of the script, the vessel was additionally described as "the greatest starship ever built." [2]

The revised Enterprise appearing in Rihanna's video for "Sledgehammer"

For its appearance in Star Trek Beyond , the Enterprise was refitted by Sean Hargreaves . According to Hargreaves, the redesign consisted primarily of proportional modifications, including placing the warp nacelles further apart and sweeping back the warp pylons to pull the engines back from the rim of the saucer. [3]

The revised Enterprise appeared in the music video for the song " Sledgehammer ", the single from Star Trek Beyond by Rihanna .

Apocrypha [ ]

The previous USS Enterprise of the alternate reality

Star Trek: Countdown to Darkness , Issue #2 shows that the Enterprise had another predecessor after Enterprise NX-01 in the alternate reality. This ship was in service since, at least, 2239 , during which it was under the command of the alternate reality's Robert April ( β ), who abandoned the ship and disappeared during that same year. The ship was then later decommissioned in 2257 . According to the biography on the Star Trek movie app, Christopher Pike was appointed captain of this USS Enterprise ( β ) in 2254 .

The 2013 virtual collectible card battle game Star Trek: Rivals has the USS Enterprise as card #108.

The Enterprise , or rather the alternate reality Constitution -class, is available as a playable ship in Star Trek Online with the release of the Agents of Yesterday expansion pack, via players opening in-game Kelvin Timeline lockboxes that have a chance to have the vessel inside. It is known in the game as the "Kelvin Timeline Heavy Command Cruiser". Players in the game, who play starship captains in the "prime" universe, also participate in missions visiting the alternate reality, interacting with the Constitution -class ship USS Yorktown ( β ) and crew member 0718 .

The Constitution -class of the alternate reality is significantly larger than the prime timeline's version, and is both longer and "taller" than a prime universe Galaxy -class vessel. In-game references state that thanks to rapid development of military technology in the alternate reality, its weapons and other systems are comparable to those used by prime universe starships in the early 25th-century, despite being developed over a century "earlier".

The Star Trek: Boldly Go comic series revealed that the crew of the Enterprise went different ways while the USS Enterprise -A was being built. James Kirk was given temporary command of the USS Endeavour ( β ) with Leonard McCoy and Pavel Chekov joining him. Spock and Nyota Uhura took a leave of absence from Starfleet and were living on New Vulcan with Spock, focusing on building a new Vulcan Science Academy . Montgomery Scott divided his time between supervising the construction of the Enterprise -A and teaching at Starfleet Academy . Hikaru Sulu was promoted to lieutenant commander and assigned to the USS Concord ( β ) as first officer under the command of Clark Terrell ( β ).

External links [ ]

• USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) (alternate reality) at Memory Beta , the wiki for licensed Star Trek works
• Experience the Enterprise
• 3 USS Antares (32nd century)

• Cast & crew
• User reviews

The brash James T. Kirk tries to live up to his father's legacy with Mr. Spock keeping him in check as a vengeful Romulan from the future creates black holes to destroy the Federation one pl... Read all The brash James T. Kirk tries to live up to his father's legacy with Mr. Spock keeping him in check as a vengeful Romulan from the future creates black holes to destroy the Federation one planet at a time. The brash James T. Kirk tries to live up to his father's legacy with Mr. Spock keeping him in check as a vengeful Romulan from the future creates black holes to destroy the Federation one planet at a time.

• J.J. Abrams
• Roberto Orci
• Alex Kurtzman
• Gene Roddenberry
• Zachary Quinto
• 1.6K User reviews
• 532 Critic reviews
• 82 Metascore
• 27 wins & 95 nominations total

• Spock Prime

• (as Zoë Saldana)

• Amanda Grayson

• George Kirk

• Winona Kirk

• Captain Robau

• Officer Pitts
• (as Antonio Elias)
• All cast & crew
• Production, box office & more at IMDbPro

More like this

Did you know

• Trivia Simon Pegg did not audition for the role - he simply received an email from J.J. Abrams asking if he would like to play Scotty. Pegg said he would have done this for free, or even paid Abrams to be in this film, if he had not been offered a role.
• Goofs After Spock boards the Vulcan ship on board the mining vessel, Kirk is seen walking through some pipes. His Starfleet phaser has switched to a Romulan gun (longer barrel and no lights), before switching back to the Starfleet one again in the next scene. He actually acquires the Romulan gun a few scenes later.

Spock Prime : James T. Kirk!

James T. Kirk : Excuse me?

Spock Prime : How did you find me?

James T. Kirk : Whoa... how do you know my name?

Spock Prime : I have been and always shall be your friend.

James T. Kirk : Wha...

[shakes head]

James T. Kirk : Uh... look... I-I don't know you.

Spock Prime : I am Spock.

James T. Kirk : Bullshit.

• Crazy credits The first part of the closing credits is styled after the opening credits of Star Trek (1966) , where the starship Enterprise blasts off into space as a monologue describes its mission, and then the cast names appear as the famous "Star Trek" theme music plays.
• Connections Edited into De wereld draait door: Episode #4.157 (2009)
• Soundtracks Theme from 'Star Trek' TV Series Written by Alexander Courage & Gene Roddenberry

User reviews 1.6K

• jmariani-59799
• Jul 13, 2021

Reboots & Remakes

• If this premise is that an alternate timeline created when Nero traveled back in time, then what happened to James Kirk's older brother, Sam, aka George Samuel Kirk Jr.?
• How can Spock's mother still be alive years later (original series) when she dies earlier on in this movie ?
• What is Star Trek about?
• May 8, 2009 (United States)
• United States
• Official Facebook
• Star Trek: The Future Begins
• Vasquez Rocks Natural Area Park - 10700 W. Escondido Canyon Rd., Agua Dulce, California, USA (Vulcan)
• Paramount Pictures
• Spyglass Entertainment
• See more company credits at IMDbPro
• $150,000,000 (estimated)
• $257,730,019
• $75,204,289
• May 10, 2009
• $385,681,768

Technical specs

• Runtime 2 hours 7 minutes
• Dolby Digital
• Dolby Atmos
• 2.35 : 1 (original ratio)
• 2.39 : 1 (original ratio)

Related news

Contribute to this page.

• IMDb Answers: Help fill gaps in our data
• Learn more about contributing

More to explore

Recently viewed

J.J. Abrams' New USS Enterprise Fully Revealed!

by Alex Billington November 11, 2008 Source: EW

Star Trek fans have been waiting years to finally see this. J.J. Abrams has officially unveiled our very first look at the new USS Enterprise (NCC-1701), the pride of the Federation fleet. EW is the first to debut this new image straight from the upcoming Star Trek trailer due out in theaters in front of Quantum of Solace on Friday. Additionally, Abrams has chimed in with a bit of background explanation behind the design. "Abrams wanted to take the original TV series Enterprise and the movie franchise Enterprise and fuse them together into a new yet familiar Enterprise." And without any further delay, here it is below!

Abrams explains that he wanted a ship that felt very realistic and could stand up to today's visual effects standards. "If you're going to do Star Trek there are many things you cannot change. The Enterprise is a visual touchstone for so many people. So if you're going to do the Enterprise, it better look like the Enterprise, because otherwise, what are you doing?" Damn good point - and I think Star Trek fans will most certainly be pleased. He also recalls his experience first seeing the Enterprise revealed in Star Trek: The Motion Picture . "The coolest thing about it—maybe the coolest thing in the movie—was when you flew around the ship, you could see all the different panels that made up the ship. It was the first time I had ever seen that level of attention, that love of detail, given to the tangible, practical reality of the ship."

Star Trek is directed by J.J. Abrams (of "Lost" and Mission: Impossible III ) and is written by Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci (of The Island , Mission: Impossible III , Transformers , and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen ). This is the 11th movie in the Star Trek universe, following most recently Star Trek: Nemesis in 2002. Star Trek is set to land in theaters everywhere on May 8th, 2009 next summer!

Find more posts: First Look , Hype , Photos

40 Comments

I like the fact that they didn't go too far from the original version. It has an updated look that also manages to keep a lot of the retro elements that make the Enterprise recognizable to the fans.

Frost on Nov 11, 2008

I dig it i dig it....

Curtis on Nov 11, 2008

Eric on Nov 11, 2008

Don't like it. Here's why: http://screenrant.com/new-star-trek-movie-uss-enterprise-vic-4205/ Vic

ScreenRant.com on Nov 11, 2008

Josh on Nov 11, 2008

pretty cool!

dan on Nov 11, 2008

im wet.....lol

cameron on Nov 11, 2008

it looks retarded and the disc looks out of proportion with the rest of it. It will probably look better in motion though

tashawnda on Nov 11, 2008

i like it, didn't change much and has the whole 60s types of curves

Janny on Nov 11, 2008

That's the best looking screenshot from this movie we've seen yet. I think the crew looks a little too young, but they nailed the Enterprise!

Arp on Nov 11, 2008

Looks pretty much how you'd think it would, no real surprises here.

joshmc on Nov 11, 2008

Are there any non Star Trek fans excited about this? Are the true Star Trek fans excited about this? Do they expect any non Trek fans to see this movie? Just not feeling it...

TBone on Nov 11, 2008

#12 i am liking this shot of all of the recent ones, but star tek has been dumbed down by the silly t.v series of late all fake and ridiculous aliens getting along... but im not a trekkie and hope this can change my mind about what i think is a last stab at credibility in the sci fi game. by young unproven actors-except bana

bassbin on Nov 12, 2008

Hey who's the butt monkey who removed my comments from here?? dam you Billington!! Argghhh!!

Alec Baldwin on Nov 12, 2008

looks like the previous Enterprise...As I see it, maybe that will change inside is more

Blackjack Las Vegas on Nov 12, 2008

Still looks like a cross between an electric shaver and some kind of weird sex toy.

kevjohn on Nov 12, 2008

#4 - I disagree with your taste in ... Enterprise. I like the sleek sci-fi organic-ness of the new Enterprise. It makes it look more realistic and less like a diarama project at the science fair made out of styroform. Granted, the bottom engine portion does look like an electric razor, but that ship will give the galaxy a irresistably smooth shave. Like Abrams said earlier, he isn't aiming for a true homage for the fanbase - its for fans of movies. I think he's taking an accurate approach and giving it a sci-fi style that feels realistic on a grand scale. I'm not creaming my pants over this movie, but all the pics I've seen are enough to get me excited to see it.

Nick Sears on Nov 12, 2008

For not being a Star Trek geek, the marketing for this particular movie has REALLY grabbed my attention and I am extremely excited to see it. Not sure how they did it but those marketers are ahmazing.

seductiveflamingo on Nov 12, 2008

Enterprise FAIL!!! Same mistake they made with the Enterprise TV show...rewriting history and doing it badly. I think the ship looks fine but what it doesn't look like is the f***ing Enterprise! Certainly looks like a pretty decent Starfleet ship maybe. But it's not an Enterprise...As Scotty might say, no bloody A, B, C or D.

Rev.St.Huck on Nov 12, 2008

It sucks. Plain and simple. The Saucer is out of proportion, the warp nacelles look like dildoes; what in the hell is wrong with the designer? I saw a concept design that looked SO much better than this that they could've gone with. As for the cast, I'm cool with most of it. They are supposed to be younger. But the storyline sucks as much as the ship. Why? Because it's Kirk's first outing, but it's also the ENTERPRISE's first outing. According to canon, the ENTERPRISE was first commanded for a year by Captain Robert April, than for another FIFTEEN YEARS by Captain Christopher Pike. Only then did Captain James T. Kirk get his hands on her. While I'm not entirely boycotting this movie (I will make an effort to see it), I'm going into this whole thing skeptical. And this design for the ENTERPRISE just blows chunks.

TJ on Nov 12, 2008

t-BONE is just a Trek hater, or maybe it's just Outer Space he hates. ...or anything related, maybe his parents would not let him play with Space toys or SPACE BALLS. And with the exception of the fuslage..... IT IS THE FREAKING ENTERPRISE! J M and J!

t-bonehater on Nov 12, 2008

Eh, its alright. The sweep of the nacelle pylons looks off, and the secondary hull has a Next Generation look about it, but its alright...I guess.

Janu Hull on Nov 12, 2008

Yeah it looks decent, I'm not a trekker but I know my stuff. I like the crew, Zachary Quinto and Simon Pegg especially. I feel like their Kirk is a little too pretty. Like, William Shatner was much more macho than this new guy but I'm open minded. I feel like the new Enterprise is just a little off. Like the pieces don't match each other or it doesn't transition visually from one section of the ship to another or something. Or maybe I'm just talking gibberish. Whatever, despite having only seen maybe two or three episodes of the original show I'm excited. I like cool movies and this has all the ingredients if you ask me.

Da Man on Nov 12, 2008

I had a model of the Enterprise when I was a kid, which if you look at it from the 60's and now the 21st Century version. I would say well done. And for your math T-Boner, it's like 40 years. But it seems no one wants to compare the two, after all, if it were not for the 60s orginal, the Trekkies in the house, ( who T-boner obviously hates with every fiber of his being) well, shit....there wouldn't be any. I like it, I want to see it, but I am not a Trekster. Sorry Boner. "Stand by for his attacks".

D-9 on Nov 12, 2008

I like the design of the Enterprise for this movie. The thing you have to remember about this movie is that it is not a continuation of the original but a reboot of the franchise, much like Batman Begins. I thinkt that people need to approach this with an open mind, don't expect what you've already got. Even tho I am not a devout Trekker, I do enjoy the movies and a little TNG, and I can tell you that just with the cast they've assembled is enough for me to go see this movie. I am a hugh fan of Zachary Quinto and Simon Pegg, and I am curious to see where they take their respective characters.

R2 DTwizzle on Nov 12, 2008

Crap design. The only good part is the saucer section, and that's only because it's from the Enterprise refit from the Motion Picture. I like the comment about the warp nacelle dildos, haha 🙂

avoidz on Nov 12, 2008

Hey D-9! Me...attacks??? Nahhhhhh... I thank the people who answered the questions I asked with respect, because I really wanted to know if this was appealing to more than just Tre...excuse me...fans of the genre. I find it interesting that I only catch slack from D-9, and others it seems, on the comments of articles related to Star Trek. Which tells me D-9 still has that Enterprise model and most likely has to dust it (and other things...haha) off himself because he has no girl. Thanks again to the others and I apologize about the above part I pry should have left out but just couldn't resist.

TBone on Nov 12, 2008

First, Batman Begins was not a reboot; it was based loosely off of Frank Miller's Batman: Year One storyline, which has been canonized in the comics as how Batman really began. I stand by my comments, especially sice avoidz liked my nacelle dildo comparison.

TJ on Nov 13, 2008

Wow haters if you dont like it, dont watch the movie. Period. I bet you're going to eat your underwear and watch it anyway.

mandarin on Nov 13, 2008

Hahahahaha.....TBone is freakin hilarious. Hey mandarin.....eat my underwear! This movie sucks!

OhNo on Nov 13, 2008

mandarin, I already stated I would watch it. Read other posts before you post some stupid comment. Confuscious TJ has spoken!

TJ on Nov 14, 2008

if you go to youtube you can see the trailer for the new Star Trek 11 Jornada nas Estrelas (Trailer 14 nov 2008 the link is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0WNPb8R-40

tiger2411 on Nov 15, 2008

At least this Enterprise looks like it won't break or break down too easily. Having the Enterprise lose warp drive because somebody spilled coffee on an instrument panel always reeked of poor writing. If this flick restarts the whole franchise and erases 90% of the Trek Universe, I say "Woo Hoo!". Trek since 1987 has devolved into a mushy, gooey waste of time. At least have a few Aliens that aren't Humans with bumpy foreheads, and at least make some of them stink so bad you can't be on the same ship with them.

eman on Nov 16, 2008

I don't recall the ENTERPRISE ever loosing warp drive due to coffee spillage. And my roommate sitting next to me has been a Trekkie from the very begginning, and he can tell you that that never happened. I don't know where your resources come from, but please double-check before you write something like that. I do agree with the rest of the comment, although I am a huge fan of STAR TREK: DEEP SPACE NINE. I would LOVE to see some NINE-Based films.

TJ on Nov 16, 2008

I love the new Enterprize

Reggie on Nov 21, 2008

This Enterprise looks too retarded! I like the action this film seems to promise...but geez! Who the hell designed this ducks ass called the Enterprise???? It's so damn ugly!

Joe on Dec 6, 2008

Enterprises may come and go, Trek technology may be updated from time to time, but the one piece of technology you can count on never breaking is the gravity generation systems. Those babies are built to last.

Mark N. on Apr 11, 2009

It looks like someone was drinking beer and droped it and glued it back together wrong!!!!

BLACKHOLE on Sep 11, 2009

Just saw it. It is a wild ride that doesn't let up. Excellent casting to approximate the original crew only as teenagers. How do they learn all this stuff in 4 years of Starfleet anyway?? I guess they will have learning pills by then. Aside from the skepticism of young bucks kicking butt all over the galaxy, it's great fun. I do recommend this movie, because it's worth seeing!

dildo on Jan 12, 2010

I wonder when we will finally get to see a new Star Trek film. Someone said that JJ Abrams was making a Star Trek film, but I've yet to see it. I saw J-Trek, but not Star Trek. Lens Flares must have prevented me from seeing it. LOL! This movie was a serious joke!

Joe on Feb 5, 2010

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.

FEATURED POSTS

FOLLOW FS HERE

Here is Alex's new account on Bluesky :

Add our posts to your Feedly : click here

Your Privacy Manager

LATEST TO WATCH

  ▶   She's Back!! Mia Goth in First Trailer for Ti West's 'MaXXXine' Horror ( Apr 8 )   ▶   Watch: Jonathan Glazer's Ad for Prada - Featuring Scarlett Johansson ( Apr 7 )   ▶   Official Trailer for 'Ka Whawhai Tonu' Film Set in New Zealand in 1864 ( Apr 7 )   ▶   New 'Prepare' Featurettes for Prime's 'Fallout' Post-Apocalyptic Series ( Apr 5 )   ▶   Official Trailer for 'The 50' Doc About Prisoners Becoming Counselors ( Apr 5 )

Want emails instead? Subscribe to our daily newsletter updates:

© 2006-2024 First Showing® LLC. All rights reserved.     Privacy Policy     |     Letterboxd ➚     |     Bookshop ➚     |     Support Us ➚    

How J.J. Abrams rescued the ‘Star Trek’ enterprise

Every now and then, the various creators entrusted with the “Star Trek” legacy hit on some new element that leaves a lasting imprint. Introducing the hive-minded Borg, say, to give the Klingons some competition in the all-time galactic scourge department. Or raising the mission stakes so that it’s not just nameless ensigns who can perish, but even a character like Spock.

Director J.J. Abrams’s contribution is something more basic, but also far greater. With 2009’s feature reboot, “Star Trek,” he proved that the series could be recast, have its decades of sprawling continuity set aside, and still feel just as distinctive and stimulating as it had in its finest hours. (Not to mention even more profitable: Abrams’s $140 million production pulled in $258 million domestically. That made it a high point on a par with the lower-budgeted “Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home,” which grossed $110 million back in 1986.) At a time when one of sci-fi’s most iconic franchises had been stalled for years, Abrams, Chris Pine’s Captain Kirk, Zachary Quinto’s Spock, and the rest of their crew found a way to make “Trek” relevant again.

Advertisement

“Without question, our first movie involved a lot of heavy lifting in introducing a new cast, tone, and timeline,” says Abrams, speaking by phone from a publicity event in London, a featured setting in his $185 million sequel, “Star Trek Into Darkness,” opening at IMAX venues on Wednesday and in other formats on Thursday. “The fun of this one is that now we were able to pick and choose what, if anything, we wanted to pull out from existing lore.”

What’s perhaps most intriguing about “Into Darkness,” though, is that Abrams isn’t necessarily following the trail he strived to blaze last time. Despite shrewdly positioning themselves to boldly go where no “Trek” adventure had gone before, and pursue whatever new plot line popped into their imaginations, Abrams and his writers opted instead to delve back into continuity. They developed a story echoing “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” (1982), in which William Shatner’s Kirk is pushed to extremes by Ricardo Montalban’s Khan, a genetically engineered nemesis with a grudge dating to the 1967 TV episode “Space Seed.” (Trekkies can quote you every line of Leonard Nimoy’s big-screen death scene as Spock: “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few,” etc., etc.)

In the new film, Pine’s Kirk is similarly tested by seemingly superhuman John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch of the BBC’s “Sherlock”), a Starfleet officer who turns against the Federation (Benedict Arnold?) and begins launching catastrophic terrorist strikes. Although Kirk’s chronic recklessness has recently earned him a demotion, he’s reinstated as captain to track the fleeing Harrison into Klingon space and get justice — or revenge.

You can see where the story and its roots satisfy the popcorn-entertainment requisites of Abrams, who established himself as a brand name with TV’s “Alias” and “Lost,” and made his feature debut on “Mission: Impossible III” (2006). More recently, he was tapped to relaunch “Star Wars” in 2015. “I was never a big ‘Star Trek’ fan,” Abrams, 46, says with signature effusiveness, recapping news he broke to Trekkies last time around. “I liked the movies — they were more accessible to me than the TV show — but none of it would have made my desert-island discs collection. It was always a little talky for me. I knew that if it had had more visceral energy and muscularity, I would have bought into the intellectual side more.” So what better territory to re-explore than “Wrath of Khan,” an installment notable, by vintage “Trek” standards, for ratcheting up the visual intensity and delivering what felt like a stand-alone spectacle? (In many ways, the film was the prototypical Hollywood reboot, so completely independent from 1979’s ponderous “Star Trek: The Motion Picture” that it could have dropped the “II” from its title.)

Still, there’s action, and then there’s Abrams-style action. So you say you dug Kirk’s stratospheric skydiving with Sulu (John Cho) in the last movie? “Into Darkness” gives you an encore — in space. The Enterprise ventures into a couple of environments that really do feel, visually, like new frontiers for the series. And the sequel’s hard open drops Kirk and Dr. McCoy (Karl Urban) into headhunter peril so affectionately modeled after “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” you’d swear Abrams was angling for a crack at a second George Lucas franchise.

But even in the amped-up Trekscape, character ultimately rules. And this is where Abrams’s vision continues to diverge from previously established canon. “Into Darkness” puts a primary focus on Kirk and Spock’s eternal friendship, of course. (Wonder whether “Trek” creator Gene Roddenberry would have dropped “bromance” into his original story bible, if only the term had been coined a few decades earlier?) At the same time, though, the sequel gets back to the relationship between Spock and Uhura (Zoe Saldana), one of the big surprises from ’09, and offers some interesting new turns for them.

You wonder if it was a given that the couple would grab spotlight time again, or if there were perhaps other new character dynamics that the filmmakers considered for the Enterprise crew. “There are other stories that we’ve played with,” Abrams says. “But when you have a movie that’s two hours long, and a group of over half a dozen critical characters demanding attention, it’s hard to find time for all the nuances you want. There was [an idea] implying the sexuality of one of the characters, a back story for another character that was pretty intense, a really funny story we wanted to do with yet another. Hopefully, if there are future films, those other stories will get their moment.”

During a visit with the Globe last fall for another genre entry, “Dredd,” Urban considered the prospects from a cast perspective. Clearly something of a fanboy himself, he had given classic “Trek” a fresh power viewing with his son a couple of years before even auditioning for his McCoy riff. So when asked if he could see these incarnations of Kirk, Spock, and Bones progressing to a point where they might, oh, camp out together (as in “Star Trek V”), he gets it. “Really the possibilities are limitless,” Urban says. “Certainly the characters always drew me to the original series as much as the science fiction. Watching these characters who didn’t always see eye to eye have to overcome their personal differences in order to defeat a common adversary — that was always the heart and soul of ‘Star Trek.’ And I think that’s something that J.J. absolutely nails.”

It’s difficult to gauge whether the Klingons represent another case of “Trek” mainstays on the shortlist for a close-up. The warriors’ brief “Into Darkness” appearance feels like it could be a prelude to bigger developments — but then, maybe it’s just an Easter egg. (The movie certainly has its share.) “We did something cool with the Klingons that ended up being cut from our first film, and we all really wanted to bring them back,” Abrams says. “It wasn’t something done with a trilogy in mind. But we’ve had discussions about what might come next, for sure.”

The indicators are that Abrams’s involvement with subsequent chapters will be as a producer, given his directing commitment on “Star Wars: Episode VII.” (The next “Trek” is reportedly being eyed for 2016; there’s been some speculative chattering — rationally, as it happens — about what a solid replacement “Cloverfield” director and Abrams associate Drew Goddard might make.) The “Trek” cast and others in Abrams’s circle have described “Star Wars” as his dream gig, but naturally, his own take is the one you itch to hear. What place does one franchise occupy relative to the other in his right brain, and his heart? Can he bring balance to these two pop-cultural forces?

“I would say that ‘Star Trek,’ which I came to love much later in life, is very much about us, and where we are in the future,” Abrams says. “Quite a bit of ‘Into Darkness’ takes place on Earth — we see London and San Francisco 300 years from now. Between that and these very specific, unique characters Gene Roddenberry created, it feels like a very human and grounded thing, despite it being about traveling into the void of space.

“ ‘Star Wars,’ for me, was always a wonderful, mind-blowing, other kind of thing entirely — a portal into a completely different universe,” he continues. Laughing, he adds, “It’s almost like saying to someone, ‘You’re making two movies set on Earth — aren’t you afraid they’re going to be too similar? They’ve both got bipeds and cars and . . . ” I think they’re fundamentally very different. But they both have an incredible sense of adventure.”

Tom Russo can be reached at [email protected] .

First full look at the new Enterprise

Star Trek's latest take on the ship is unveiled

The first full of shot of the USS Enterprise is JJ Abrams’ new take on Star Trek has been revealed. Yesterday, Total Film’s Sam blogged about seeing the footage from the flick. Now you can see the USS Enterprise, the starship made famous in the series as she appears in the film in our gallery. Iconic look And, as the first teaser trailer suggested, the shape of the vessel has been left largely as it was, albeit with some modernising touches and different nacelles.

"If you're going to do Star Trek there are many things you cannot change, Abrams tells EW . "The Enterprise is a visual touchstone for so many people. So if you're going to do the Enterprise, it better look like the Enterprise, because otherwise, what are you doing?"

It just serves to make us more certain that JJ Abrams has nailed Star Trek. Now we can look forward to the new trailer, which should be online at the weekend.

Sign up to the GamesRadar+ Newsletter

Weekly digests, tales from the communities you love, and more

The Total Film team are made up of the finest minds in all of film journalism. They are: Editor Jane Crowther, Deputy Editor Matt Maytum, Reviews Ed Matthew Leyland, News Editor Jordan Farley, and Online Editor Emily Murray. Expect exclusive news, reviews, features, and more from the team behind the smarter movie magazine. 

Mark Hamill reacts to those bizarre Star Wars beer adverts, and his response is hilarious

As its sequel is announced, one of the best Adam Sandler movies is rising up Netflix's top 10

Former Diablo 3 dev regrets pushing back against more complex skill system that "would have been probably better than what we have today" for ARPG veterans

Most Popular

By Molly Edwards 8 April 2024

By Hirun Cryer 8 April 2024

By Catherine Lewis 8 April 2024

By Bradley Russell 8 April 2024

By Lauren Milici 8 April 2024

By Emily Garbutt 8 April 2024

By Fay Watson 8 April 2024

By Amy West 8 April 2024

The New Enterprise Design

Exterior Design Interior Design The Size Controversy Final Remarks

This is a commentary (rant?) on the ship's design and a fact-based analysis of its scaling. If you have a low tolerance threshold for criticism about the new Star Trek, simply don't read on.

Exterior Design

The new design is unsatisfactory. First off, irrespective of all continuity concerns, I simply don't think it is a great design. I concede that it is overall not quite the butt-ugly "Edselprise" that I saw in it at a first glance and that made me cry in terror (because it was shown from an unfavorable angle). Still, the classic shapes of the saucer and the deflector don't mix with the stylish add-ons and the intricate curvatures. This way it appears like a kitbash, like an odd blend of the TMP Enterprise with an alien CGI ship of the week. The overall proportions are not sufficiently balanced, and the whole ship leans forward too much. I imagine that the engineering hull including the nacelle struts should be moved back relative to the saucer, neck and nacelles to get its look "right". The engineering hull initially appeared to be too small relative to the saucer, but in hindsight I have to admit that the perspective of the photo was deceptive. Yet, the massive neck looks odd relative to the rather small engineering hull. And regarding the aforementioned unfavorable angle, previous major starship designs, and especially the ones by Matt Jefferies and Andrew Probert, looked great from any angle.

Overall, the design does not have the clarity that can be found on Jefferies's original Enterprise, on Probert's TMP Enterprise and Enterprise-D or on Eaves's Enterprise-E . It simply takes basic features that inevitably belong to a Starfleet ship, such as the saucer and the deflector dish, and supplements them with features that are currently deemed stylish. The Enterprises of the past were design classics in much the same fashion as a '57 Corvette or even an iPod. The new one reminds me of the design experiments of car manufacturers such as BMW or Renault since the early 2000s, who added aggressively shaped headlights or "illogical" curved sharp edges to otherwise conventional looking cars.

The curved backlit cowling on the warp nacelles (the light obviously being warp plasma) that I already dislike for its mere look does not make much sense, as in this region of the nacelle we would expect the warp coils. And since these are always straight for all we know, having a warped plasma outlet is a useless fad. The movable segments of at the aft end of the nacelles, as well as on the deflector dish, belong into the same category. It may not be a big deal considering that the warp nacelles of Voyager are even tilting in their entirety. Still, for 40 years Starfleet ships could go without moving parts and I think there is no reason to break with this tradition just for an additional cool visual effect.

Furthermore, while all other parts of the ship are more solid than on either the TOS and the TMP Enterprise, the nacelle struts are relatively thin compared to ships of other classes - especially considering that the new Enterprise is being built on the ground. Also, the pylons run into the engineering hull in the region of the shuttlebay. The pylon structure and the power transfer conduit have to continue somehow inside the ship. Although the cross-section of the new shuttlebay is relatively about the same as on the original and on the refitted Constitution (at Church's original design size of 366m), it may be further obstructed by the warp pylons. In the movie itself we get a glimpse of the open shuttlebay, where two rows of the large new shuttles are stacked on either side of the shuttlebay. A ship of 366m length would not be big enough for that . Anyway, on screen there is no sign of the power transfer conduits inside the shuttlebay, so it may work out after all, unless the CGI ship "cheats" in a way that the pylons simply do not continue inside the ship.

Sure, the new look of the Enterprise (and of pretty much everything else in the movie) is the result of Nero's manipulations of history. We've certainly had countless time travel incidents in 40 years of Star Trek. Usually any damage to history was repaired in the end (such as the Borg attack on Cochrane's camp in "Star Trek: First Contact"), or it turned out insignificant enough to remain only a side note (such as Sisko's role as "Gabriel Bell" in DS9: "Past Tense"). This is very different in "Star Trek (2009)", because the alternate timeline created in the movie will persist . The new Enterprise is not reverted to the TOS version in the end, and pretty much everything that we know from the classic Star Trek will never happen in the Abramsverse - at least, it shouldn't happen if the new timeline (officially named Kelvin Timeline since 2016) wants to be taken seriously.

If we leave aside the idea of an altered timeline for a moment, the new Enterprise discards the visual continuity that has been a part of the Trek lore for 40 years for all the reasons that I anticipated some time ago. I was prepared to see a restyled Enterprise that would look clearly more modern than the TOS ship. I was hoping for it to retain certain retro elements to set it apart from the 24th century design style and, perhaps even more importantly, from its own refit in TMP. But the underlying style of the new ship is the TMP saucer with indifferent looking add-ons. The only retro element is the deflector dish. It could be any vessel in any later era, even an Enterprise-F or -G. While it undeniably still looks like a Starfleet ship, it does not fit into Starfleet's design lineage.

Since it is a different timeline, the TOS Enterprise the way we used to know it has ceased to exist. For what it's worth, the new Enterprise could work half-way plausibly as design that is contemporary with the TMP Enterprise. While the proportions of the saucer are not exactly the same as on the TMP ship and the curvature of the saucer edge is different (more rounded), the window arrangement and the three horizontal stripes look much the same. It is also interesting to note that the saucer underside that used to be concave on the original and the TMP refit (missing the inner parts of the lowermost full deck) is now flush.

Side note It has been a recurring nuisance for almost two years that the re-imagined Enterprise by Gabe Koerner was mistaken for the one to appear in the movie. Most fans presumed that the actual movie ship would be closer to the original. But now we are left with an even more radical redesign in several respects. Koerner kept the TOS saucer essentially as it was, and while his secondary hull is unnecessarily segmented and greebled, the elements roughly retain their basic dimensions, unlike on the new movie Enterprise.

Enterprise redesigns

We can see the reconstructed Enterprise warp away at the end of "Star Trek Into Darkness". Most notably the previously two impulse engine exhausts are combined to one. The redesign in "Star Trek Beyond" incorporates further changes. The nacelle pylons now lean back, and the neck was made thinner. While this is primarily a plot-driven change to make the ship more vulnerable to the Swarm attack in "Star Trek Beyond", it was also described as being closer to the original Enterprise, in an attempt at fan service.

Enterprise-A

Interior Design

The bridge set of the Abramsverse Enterprise is easily the most sophisticated and flashy looking bridge in the history of Star Trek. The set design is a conglomerate of all kinds of styles previously seen in the franchise, and not at all in the sense of a homage. It is playful with its huge display that is being animated all the time (it must drive the crew crazy), with its complex and fragmented controls and with spotlights in every corner. The spotlights most likely blind the crew in the same fashion as they create lens flares. The bridge has large glass panes of the same kind that were deemed good enough only for "disposable" parallel universe versions of the Enterprise-D bridge. One (behind the desk) even has a totally pointless "printed circuit" decoration on it, of the kind that Mike Okuda routinely created for alien ships of the week. There is absolutely nothing on the bridge that is particularly reminiscent of the TOS era even if we don't expect total purism. Not the captain's chair, which looks like on the Defiant, not the railing, which is "fragile" like on the more recent bridge designs, not the ceiling (that we admittedly never saw on TOS), which looks like designed by Apple. The color scheme is an uninteresting "cool white/blue". I have seen many quickly redressed bridges of the week in the various Star Trek series that were better designed.

Even if we put up with the idea of anachronisms in the 23rd century in "Star Trek (2009)", the sophistication level on the new bridge just doesn't feel right. As much as I have always criticized Star Trek Enterprise for having too advanced technology , at least it was reasonable as an intermediate step between the 21st and the 24th century. Kirk's new bridge, in contrast, looks like an overblown design set in the 25th century or beyond.

Engineering

The one set that is even worse than the bridge is the engine room, which was created in the Budweiser Brewery in Van Nuys, California. The set was supposed to have a very industrial look, which may let it appear like a good idea to use a real production plant, rather than a less spacious sound stage. However, the brewery was hardly modified at all and looks just like what it is in the movie. It has big silver tanks and water pipes all over the place, as if processing water was its main purpose, rather than producing power for the ship. Also, while I concede that the traditionally crammed sets of previous Star Trek productions don't give us the sense of how big a starship really is, the engineering set of the new Enterprise takes it to the other extreme. It neither has a recognizable deck structure nor anything like bulkheads, as they are present on every ship or starship in existence. Its size is beyond reason (even if we believe in the official size of the ship), with huge empty spaces that every starship designer would want to fill with something useful or at least make accessible as additional cargo holds.

The second film, "Star Trek Into Darkness", includes the brewery set as well. While it doesn't show quite as many pointless water tanks and pipes this time, it reaffirms that the interior of the Enterprise is a huge factory, and does not feel like the engineering decks of any other Star Trek ship (or of sea ships). STID also shows us the warp core for the first time, which plays a big role towards the end of the movie. In real life, it's the National Ignition Facility, a spacious laser chamber at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California. It is pleasant to see that there is more to the engineering section than water pipes, and the industrial look of the warp core complies with the rest of the production design. Still, this new warp core has nothing in common with those established in all Prime Universe generations from Star Trek Enterprise to TNG.

The Size Controversy

The supersized enterprise.

Like millions of other fans, I watched "Star Trek (2009)". And like pretty much everyone else who cares for starship design I was totally convinced that the new ship has to be about the same size as the original Enterprise or the Enterprise refit from the Prime Universe: around 300 meters long. This is what the design clearly looks like, and there was little real evidence in the movie to the contrary - except the oversized engineering location (that almost everyone seems to hate anyway) and the scene when the shuttles with the cadets arrive at the ship. Here we can see how a dozen shuttles are stacked in two rows on each side of the obviously huge shuttlebay.

As usual, I decided to ignore the blatant mis-scaling in case of the shuttle shelves. It would not be the first time that the VFX team disregarded the design sizes as given by the designers, just for an additional dramatic impact. We all remember the Merchantman that appeared to be only shuttle-sized compared to a Klingon BoP in "Star Trek: The Search for Spock", and still no one claims that the ship is really that small. Or the Defiant in "First Contact" , which appeared to be just some 50m long compared to the Enterprise-E, whereas any other size evidence is somewhere between 100m and 170m. Or the big shuttles inside Voyager's shuttlebay , which could never pass the shuttlebay door. Or, in a more recent case, the Denobulan medical ship in ENT: "Cold Station 12" that must be some 20m long and almost as high, but fits into the shuttlebay of a Klingon Bird-of-Prey! All this we had to ignore because it was physically impossible. And so was the notion that some 24 big shuttles could be stowed aboard the new Enterprise.

But the more or less official Enterprise Tour comes up with an overall length of as much as 2500ft (762m) for the new Enterprise. The Society of Digital Artists says that the length is 2357ft (718m). And Gizmodo Blog claims that the ship is 2379.75 feet (725.35 meters) long. And because it's apparently so much fun, the blog demonstrates how well the extremely oversized ship performs compared to other sci-fi franchises, at least size-wise. Finally, we have an extra feature on the "Star Trek (2009)" Blu-ray disc that confirms the length of the new ship to be 2379.75 feet. Embarrassingly, on the comparison diagram with the TOS Enterprise that is supposed to make the huge size retroactively plausible the scale is totally off. The Abramsverse Enterprise would be just 490m long if we chose to trust the depiction, rather than the figures!

Unlike these various statements insinuate, the ship has not been designed by Ryan Church to be that massive in the first place. In an interview for the Cinefex magazine #118, ILM Art Director Alex Jaeger says: "The reconfigured ship was a larger vessel than previous manifestations -- approximately 1,200-feet-long compared to the 947-foot ship of the original series. Once we got the ship built and started putting it in environments it felt too small. The shuttle bay gave us a clear relative scale -- shuttles initially appeared much bigger than we had imagined -- so we bumped up the Enterprise scale, which gave her a grander feel and allowed us to include more detail." So the ship was designed at 1200ft (366m) by Ryan Church, and was later scaled up by a factor of 2!

My size comparison with correct relative scales speaks for itself. It is undeniable that, if we base our estimation just on the picture with the relative sizes and not on the visual effects from the movie, the true length of the new ship has to be much closer to 302m (my original assumption) than to 725m, and that Church's size of 366m works well. The 725m version is undeniably totally out of proportion.

Evidence of a huge Enterprise

In all fairness, we have got the following evidence of a huge ship.

• The teaser trailer from January 2008 shows workers on the nacelle, between the two fins at the aft end. The distance between the roots of the fins would be as much as 18m based on the visual evidence, and this gives us a ship of well over 600m length. The trailer may have been made with the new "official" larger scale of the ship.

• The shuttlebay is huge and is meant to be huge. Actually, getting a much larger and more impressive looking shuttlebay appears to have been the most important rationale to retroactively increase the scale of the ship. When the cadets arrive in "Star Trek (2009)", we can see how a dozen shuttles are stacked in two rows on each side of the shuttlebay. Since the new shuttles are more than 10m long, this shuttlebay must be at least 40m across, requiring an overall length of the Enterprise of more than 700m.
• Although starships (just like other fictional vehicles or buildings) are routinely bigger from the inside than from the outside, it is hard to imagine that the engineering set (the "brewery") could fit into the secondary hull of a 366m long Enterprise.
• When Kirk is rushing to the bridge in "Star Trek (2009)" to warn Pike about the Romulan threat, we can see him run through a corridor that is directly attached to the bridge. Such a layout seems impossible on a ship of 366m length, with a bridge module diameter of about 22m (bridge and corridor combined).
• In "Star Trek Into Darkness" the ship sports an enormous hallway with a round cross-section across many decks, which is meant to be located in the center of the saucer section. This would not fit into the saucer of a 366m Enterprise.

• In one scene in "Star Trek Into Darkness", when Kirk is talking to Scotty, he is obviously standing in the hallway and we can see one more deck and a big transparent dome above him. This is quite clearly meant to be the Enterprise's bridge dome as visible from the outside, which in this case is not located directly above the bridge. The dome measures considerably more than 10m in diameter. The size and location of the dome clearly points to a huge ship. It would be physically impossible if the (rather small) bridge occupied most of the bridge module.
• "Star Trek Beyond" shows us a close-up of the saucer edge. We can see two rows of windows, and two decks with the typical corridors with the round cross-section behind those windows. This is the same basic arrangement as in the shot with the deck that is ripped open in "Star Trek Into Darkness" (see below). There are two differences, however. The windows in "Beyond" are taller. This might corroborate the notion that there are only two deck in the saucer (as it would be the case on a comparably small ship). On the other hand, the shot in "Beyond" shows us human figures in the corridor, which allow a perhaps better size estimation of the saucer edge. It is close to 18m tall and points to a ship of over 700m length. The windows are all 2m high on the refit.
• It is obvious that the Enterprise-A as seen for the first time in "Star Trek Beyond" is supposed to be the same order of size as the destroyed ship. During the construction of the ship we can see people on the surface of the saucer that are so tiny that the saucer has to be considerably more than 200m across.

Yet, there are no known cues in the model itself that would point to a ship much longer than 366m, which is no surprise because obviously the finished model has been scaled up. It is only possible that the skin of the CGI model and hence the level of detail of the hull plates with their "Aztec pattern" was scaled down relative to the TMP Enterprise refit to that end.

Evidence of a smaller Enterprise

So what can we make of the supersized Enterprise? We may decide to simply believe what the more or less official sources keep telling us. Or we can base our size estimation on visual evidence. If we take into account all visual evidence, including the design features of the ship irrespective of how big they are supposed to appear in the film (which is subject to vary), we may arrive at a different conclusion than if we just take into account the opened shuttlebay and the brewery set. It is a mistake in engineering to increase the dimensions until everything fits, thereby approaching or even exceeding a previously established size limit. I think it is just as wrong to nail down a huge size for the new Enterprise to make everything fit, instead of seeking a solution that may work with overall less suspension of disbelief.

There are reasons why I have settled on the original design length of 366m as the true size of the ship.

• The sheer size of the Super-Enterprise is ludicrous. Had it been a fan design submitted to me for consideration, I would have declined it right away as a fanboyish übership irrespective of the excuse that it's a parallel universe, unless the designer had agreed to modify the size to something more reasonable. At 725m length the Enterprise would be 2.5 times as long as the original Enterprise, and it would have as much as 15.8 times its volume! The alternate ship would dwarf any known Starfleet vessel of the Prime Universe, including the biggest starship classes of the 24th century. Sure, there is no rule for the development of starship sizes over time. But the leap to 15.8 times as large vessels in this new universe is a stretch by any means, especially if we consider that many things (such as the senior crew) are still the same in spite of the significant historical and technological differences. Well, the Vengeance from STID is still a lot bigger than the Enterprise (more than twice as long as it seems). Some may argue that if the Vengeance can be over 700m long, we should go the whole way and accept that the Enterprise measures 725m and the Vengeance one mile. To me the Vengeance (which can be operated with a very small crew and includes vast empty spaces) is just more proof that the people in charge totally have lost perspective of ship sizes, and I prefer to limit the damage they have done by keeping at the least the Enterprise at a reasonable size.
• The proportions of the saucer, neck, engineering hull and nacelles are somewhat different than on either the TOS and the TMP Enterprise, but overall still similar enough to put it into the same size range. In contrast, the designs of the much larger Enterprise-C (Ambassador class) and Enterprise-D (Galaxy) are visibly more compact, as we would expect from bigger ships because of the square-cube law. The big Enterprise-E (Sovereign class) is less compact again, but with its more streamlined hull the design takes a still different direction. Everything about the Abramsverse Enterprise looks like on a small (300m-400m) ship, and not as if it were bigger than the Galaxy class.
• While their sizes are subject to vary considerably between different ship classes of different eras, we would not expect the shuttlebay doors, phasers, thrusters, impulse engines, deflector dish or bridge dome to change their sizes proportionally with the rest of the ship. This, however, would be the case on the "Star Trek (2009)" Enterprise at 725m. Agreed, the shuttlebay doors and the torpedo launcher look small relative to the rest of the new Enterprise, but they match the ones of the TMP Enterprise in size, if the new ship is 366m long (obviously because they have been designed to match at that size!). Even if it could be technically possible, the proportional upsizing of almost every feature goes against the notion that it is intended to be overall bigger. The upscaled design would have to establish *some* substantial visual difference to look bigger, but it doesn't (obviously because the finished CG design was scaled up retroactively, and only the inside of the shuttlebay was adapted).

• The visible window rows make perfect sense at 302m length, and still at 366m. There are two rows of windows in the saucer edge, whose arrangement is almost exactly as on the Probert Enterprise refit. Even the two darker stripes around the edge are nearly the same. Actually, this detail was the reason for me to believe that the saucer had to be the same size (before I came across the original design size of 366m, which would naturally increase the saucer too). My original assumption made the new ship overall just a bit shorter (302m) than the TMP version (305m), and undoubtedly not by mere chance, although it turns out that Ryan Church scaled it up a bit. If the actual "Star Trek (2009)" Enterprise were more than twice as long, then the window arrangement in the saucer would be an incredibly stupid coincidence. It is already little useful to scale up hull designs as a whole. But the assumption that the windows would be still the same, leaving the new deck in between (the one behind the stripe) without windows, is extremely far-fetched. The window arrangement is a clearly visible detail and contributes greatly to the impression of the size of any ship. And with its saucer being an inflated Probert design without any changes to make the larger size plausible, it fails at a length of considerably more than 300m. The same applies to the window rows in the neck and in engineering. They always leave "coincidentally" one deck between the rows on an alleged 725m ship without windows, hence indicating that it can only be half as long.

• In "Star Trek Into Darkness" there is visual evidence of the deck arrangement in the saucer. When the Enterprise has lost power and begins to tumble in Earth's atmosphere, there is one shot of a deck in the saucer that is exposed to space due to a hull breach. It doesn't look like there are four decks in the saucer rim as it would be the case on a 725m Enterprise but rather only two. My estimation of the height of the saucer rim is 10-12m, a bit too much for the 366m ship but way to little for the 725m version that would have an 18m rim. An 18m rim can be seen in "Star Trek Beyond", however (see above).
• At more than 700m length, the ship would have overall just a handful of windows, and as already mentioned, exactly every second deck in the inhabited parts of the ship would be completely without windows. Adding more windows would have been crucial to insinuate a larger size (with a 5.6 times as large hull area), but overall the ship has rather fewer than more of them than the 305m long Enterprise refit.
• The windows on a 366m Enterprise would be some 60cm tall, and the docking ports would measure a bit more than 2m. This is about the same as on Andrew Probert's Enterprise refit, on which parts of the new design, most obviously the saucer, are based. These features would become just too large on a 725m Enterprise.
• This Enterprise has evidently been built on the ground in its entirety and must have been lifted up into orbit somehow. The length of more than 700m would aggravate the problems of getting it up into space in one piece. The Enterprise would be 16 times as heavy as originally assumed and 8 times as heavy as designed. The larger the scale , the more likely the lever forces of the nacelles would break off the nacelle pylons already when the ship is standing on the ground (that is, if the nacelle support struts in the ship yards were taken away).
• When the Enterprise arrives at Vulcan, the ship runs into a debris field and almost collides with the saucer of the USS Mayflower NCC-1621, whose diameter is at least 150% of the Enterprise's. This saucer would have to be at least 500m across, and it would belong to a ship of more than 1000m length, provided that it has about the same basic structure as the 725m Enterprise. This is clearly another case of blatant mis-scaling, because no other Starfleet ship of the movie is substantially bigger than the Enterprise, and in particular the Mayflower is smaller, as we can see at the space station. So we either have a precedence of mis-scaling that would call the alleged size of the Enterprise into question or, if there is no mis-scaling in the case of the Mayflower saucer, it does not totally preclude the possibility that there are ships with bigger 200m saucers, but only with a small Enterprise. The Vengeance is still a lot bigger than that, and one more reason why the Enterprise should be as small as possible.

• The shuttlebay with the stacked shuttles of 40m or more width is undeniably solid evidence for an upscaled ship of more than 700m. On another occasion, however, when Pike's shuttle is seen leaving the Enterprise at Vulcan, the shuttlebay doesn't look all that big - at least at a first glance. The shuttle may be some 6 meters wide, then the door opening measures some 10 meters. Perhaps a bit more, since the shuttle may already be a couple of meters ahead of the door. But overall the shuttlebay appears to be much less than 40m wide. On the other hand, the shuttle occupies the width of the letters "C-17" on the Enterprise's hull in this shot, which complies with the above shot of the huge shuttlebay. The reason for the distortion is the use of a "wide-angle lens" in this CG shot.

• When Kirk visits the building site, we can see workers close to the hull of the ship, one just in front of the nacelle and one on a bridge a couple of meters below the saucer. The saucer measures 669 pixels from the center to the lower edge. The height of the tiny human figure near the saucer is 18 pixels. Assuming that the worker measures 1.8m, this would give the saucer a radius of just 67m, which is an almost perfect match with the saucer of the TMP Enterprise! Again, this can't be a coincidence. The figure in front of the nacelle measures some 15 pixels, while the nacelle, at the same distance from the "camera", is 194 pixels high from the upper end of the pylon to the very top. The overall length of the ship would be barely 300m based on this comparison, but we would have needed to account for some parallax, so the ship may be actually somewhat longer, perhaps 366m as designed. This is in contrast to the (ultimately non-canon) teaser trailer (see above), in which the ship looks like it is over 600m long compared to the human figures.
• As already mentioned, the visible windows on a 366m Enterprise would be absolutely reasonable. But what about the bridge windows that, as we can see from inside, are rather large? The combined window/viewscreen in front of the bridge occupies much of the set's height at the edge, but it doesn't quite reach from the floor to the ceiling. I estimate it measures about 6m by 2m. This window, like the port and starboard windows that appear to have the same sizes, is visible on the CGI model. In the teaser trailer we can see the bridge almost perfectly head on, at a certain distance from the "camera", so there is practically no distortion. The window does not occupy the whole deepening into which it is embedded. We can see a faint rectangular frame inside the more rounded contour of the cavity. But this narrow slit as visible on the model is not what we are shown in the close-ups. In order for the proportions to be correct, almost two thirds of this window must be submerged. The idea of a submerged window, however, does not comply with the take of Spock standing in front of a transparent window that is obviously not in the "basement", as well as with the look inside the bridge through the 6m by 2m window. The latter have to be rated as errors in the post-production, because they don't reproduce the correct window proportions of the model. In case we decided that the entirely unobstructed view from the bridge window were the correct depiction irrespective of the inconsistency in the window width (it would have to be some 18m wide at 2m height), the ship would have to be well over 1000m long! Anyway, the 6m by 2m mostly submerged window gives us an overall bridge dome height, measured from the hull surface in the upper third of the window to the very top, of barely 6.6m. The overall length of the Enterprise, based on this evidence, would be still some 450m, but nowhere near 725m.

Other issues

I have come to terms with the new Enterprise. I have accepted it as an alternate-universe version. But that was under the precondition that the ship was 366m long. Aside from not making sense in-universe, there also a couple of real-world reasons why I hate the idea of the supersized Enterprise:

• From Matt Jefferies's original miniature to Doug Drexler's full-CGI NX-01 all Enterprises were designed, built and shown at a definite size, as it can be expected for a ship to bear the illustrious name, as opposed to an alien ship-of-the-week. The eighth Enterprise as designed by Ryan Church was originally 366m long and later scaled up at ILM without any changes to the design. The new huge size was made up way too late by people who apparently did not have an idea what they were doing. Moreover, it was evidently insufficiently communicated and accounted for.
• The new Enterprise was designed by Ryan Church to make sense at 366m length. Moreover, he laid out the overall shape, the deck structure and even many details to be a tip of the hat to Andrew Probert's Movie Enterprise. The extreme retroactive upscaling of the vessel effectively invalidates many of the designer's efforts and his good intent.
• The bigger size is explained by Jaeger as having practical reasons. But it begs the question if someone in charge was of the opinion that Star Trek had to catch up with other science fiction franchises size-wise. Because other than squeezing in all the shuttles, which was irrelevant for the story and could have been avoided, there is absolutely no reason for the extreme oversize of Star Trek's new lead vessel.

Final Remarks

In a comment at Entertainment Weekly , J.J. Abrams implicitly claims that the ship is still the same as a concession to the fans: "If you're going to do Star Trek there are many things you cannot change. The Enterprise is a visual touchstone for so many people. So if you're going to do the Enterprise, it better look like the Enterprise, because otherwise, what are you doing?" He seems to mean what he says without sarcasm, but exhibits a lackadaisical attitude about what he or his people are doing with the franchise. I am afraid that certain people, even some avid fans, rather trust such appeasing statements than their own eyes. The new ship is very different than the TOS Enterprise, and even casual fans notice that. And if we believe the official sources, it is even supposed to be a lot bigger than it should.

Regarding the size issue, I will keep the length of the new Enterprise at 366m. I am not ready to accept the more than 700m length that ignorant people in charge of the visual effects, possibly with problems to understand that there is no size competition among sci-fi franchises, may have deemed a cool idea. In spite of everything, I have a desire to maintain the continuity of the old and the new Star Trek. And this is why I keep defending the new Enterprise design at its reasonable original size. I believe it is the lesser evil to ignore the few scenes where the new ship appears to be monster-sized, rather than abandon everything I have ever read and written about starship design.

As circumstantial it may appear to people who don't care for starship designs (or other technology), the size of the new Enterprise may mark the difference between a parallel universe within the existing canon on one side, and a complete reboot, a new science fiction universe in which different rules apply than in Star Trek so far. The USS Kelvin is another trouble spot in the field of starships. Because the Kelvin, which predates the creation of the parallel universe, starts the trend of ships being much larger than any 23rd century vessel we know so far, including the Excelsior. It has a crew of 800, twice as many as on the original Enterprise 30 years later in the Prime Universe. Yet, it is supposed to be just a survey vessel. The fanboyish Vengeance with its supposed length of one mile and its silly back story is a still worse problem. Along with a certain "homage" in STID it is a reason not to take this universe seriously any longer, at least not as a canonical parallel universe.

Because of my respect for The Original Series and the fact that it has the much older rights I have chosen to give the reboot a lower weight than the classic production design from TOS to ENT. In my view the Kelvin Timeline is something like a second-rate reality, especially since the shamelessly plagiarized events of "Star Trek Into Darkness". In my Starship Database there is only a place for one "true" Enterprise NCC-1701, and it will remain Matt Jefferies's design (and it won't be replaced or supplemented by the "reimagination" from Discovery either). Yet, it is not my intention to ruin everyone else's excitement about the new universe with its new Enterprise for a new generation. I don't want to tilt against windmills, but I keep a critical distance instead of being a part of the hype.

The discussion about the new Enterprise reminds me of the "Akiraprise" controversy a couple of years ago. The Abramsverse with its lead ship, however, has damaged Star Trek's continuity more substantially than Enterprise ever could. The "Akiraprise" NX-01 could fit into the design lineage just because the series was set more than 100 years prior to TOS - and visually it is not as big a deal as I initially thought. In "In a Mirror, Darkly" the Mirror NX-01 and the TOS Defiant even appeared side by side.

Speaking of the "Akiraprise", many fans berated me for finding any fault with the ship, or with the underlying idea of Enterprise. I was aware that my unpopular stance on the Abramsverse would evoke that kind of animosity yet again, and perhaps some hate mails. However, I was not prepared for the slur campaigns against me on several message boards, especially for my heresy of not blindly accepting that the Enterprise is 725m long. I can't avoid the impression that respect and decency are getting lost not only in the new Star Trek but also in the new Star Trek fandom. And the Abramsverse was only the start, with Discovery being even more divisive since 2017 , and giving rise to even more hostility towards old-school fans for their justified criticism.

Starship Gallery - Abramsverse Vessels - Federation and Alien

Abramsverse Inconsistencies - continuity issues and nitpicking in the reboot movies

Abramsverse FAQ

Thanks to Nick Corcoran for the Jaeger quote, to Geert for reminding me that lifting a 700m vessel would be a major problem, to Dave Metlesits for the hint about the huge saucer, to bX for permission to use his size comparisons, to Brian Gordon for pointing me to the Blu-ray size comparison, to Belz... for the great find of the screen cap with Pike's shuttle, to Nihilus Shadow for finding the exposed decks and to Andrew Probert for valuable discussion. More screen caps from TrekCore and Ariane's Star Trek Gallery .

https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/new_enterprise_comment.htm

Last modified: 17 Oct 2023

© Ex Astris Scientia 1998-2024, Legal Terms

This website is not endorsed, sponsored or affiliated with CBS Studios Inc. or the Star Trek franchise.

Fleet Yards

Home > Jj Abrams Star Trek Movies In Order

Jj Abrams Star Trek Movies In Order

• UPDATED: December 1, 2023

Table of Contents

JJ Abrams Star Trek Movies in Order: A Journey through the Final Frontier

When it comes to science fiction movies, few franchises have captured the imagination of audiences quite like Star Trek. With its rich lore, captivating characters, and thought-provoking themes, Star Trek has become a cultural phenomenon that has spanned over five decades. And in 2009, director JJ Abrams took the helm to breathe new life into the beloved series with his rebooted Star Trek movies. In this article, we will take a journey through the final frontier and explore JJ Abrams’ Star Trek movies in order .

1. Star Trek (2009): The first installment of JJ Abrams’ Star Trek trilogy takes us back to the origins of the iconic crew of the USS Enterprise. This film serves as a reboot of the original series and introduces audiences to a younger version of Captain James T. Kirk (played by Chris Pine) and his loyal crew. With stunning visuals, thrilling action sequences, and a fresh take on familiar characters, Star Trek (2009) successfully reignited the franchise’s popularity.

2. Star Trek Into Darkness (2013): The second film in JJ Abrams’ trilogy delves deeper into the relationships between the crew members while introducing a formidable new villain, Khan Noonien Singh (played by Benedict Cumberbatch). As Captain Kirk faces personal and professional challenges, he must navigate a web of deception and make difficult choices that will test his leadership skills. Star Trek Into Darkness is an action-packed installment that keeps viewers on the edge of their seats.

3. Star Trek Beyond (2016): In the final chapter of JJ Abrams’ Star Trek trilogy, director Justin Lin takes over the reins to deliver an exhilarating space adventure. The crew finds themselves stranded on an uncharted planet after their ship is attacked by a ruthless alien warlord named Krall (played by Idris Elba). As they fight for survival and reunite with new allies, the crew must discover the true nature of Krall’s intentions and find a way to save the Federation. Star Trek Beyond is a fitting conclusion to Abrams’ trilogy, offering a perfect blend of action, humor, and heart.

While JJ Abrams’ Star Trek movies have faced some criticism from die-hard fans for deviating from the original series’ tone and style, they undeniably brought new life to the franchise and introduced it to a whole new generation of viewers. With their stellar cast, breathtaking visuals, and thrilling storytelling, these films successfully captured the essence of what makes Star Trek so beloved.

In addition to Abrams’ trilogy, he also served as a producer on subsequent Star Trek projects like Star Trek: Discovery and Star Trek: Picard, further expanding the universe he helped revive. Whether you’re a longtime fan or new to the series, JJ Abrams’ Star Trek movies are an exciting journey through space that should not be missed. So grab some popcorn, set your phasers to stun, and prepare for an adventure that will take you where no one has gone before.

RELATED TOPICS:

• jj abrams star trek movies in order

Related articles you'll love:

Ash williams movies in order, disney tinkerbell movies in order, what are all the thor movies in order, gods not dead movies in order, what is the thor movies in order, all aliens movies in order, latest articles, jeremy allen white – all you need to know, the boy and the heron ending explained, da’vine joy randolph – all you need to know, oscars 2024 winners, the mandalorian & grogu – all you need to know.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Ad Blocker Enabled!

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Enterprise reprised

J J Abrams's cinematic reboot of Star Trek , out on Friday, is already earning praise for returning the tired space franchise to its core values and reinstating the characters that made it great in the first place. But a band of amateur film-makers had been doing that already. Even as Enterprise, Star Trek's final TV incarnation, was limping to the end of its final season in 2005, a team of hardcore fans were quietly producing for themselves the kind of Star Trek episodes they really wanted to see.

James Cawley loved the show when he was a kid, and used to run around with his friends pretending to be Captain Kirk. Later, when he managed to get hold of the set blueprints from the original series, he decided to build a full-size replica of the Enterprise's bridge in this garage; firstly so he could, well, have the Enterprise's bridge in his garage, but also because he had a vague plan to produce his own Star Trek film. With help from his carpenter grandfather, and photo references from the show to ensure every detail was perfect, he embarked on the project on weekends. By this point, he had a lucrative career as an Elvis impersonator, which came in handy as, according to internet reports, the set alone cost him $100,000. "It's probably more like $150,000," he admits. "Although we've been doing it over a period of eight to 10 years now." And this is completely funded by Elvis paycheques? "It's pretty crazy. We have people who have donated money and I don't want to diminish their contributions, but for the most part, yeah."

Fans have been producing their own interpretations of their favourite films for decades, but it took 1997's Troops - a witty and hugely popular 10-minute parody which merged Star Wars with Cops - to kick-start a new wave. Since then the net has spewed up thousands of examples of fans playing dress-up on camera, and while 95% of them are truly unwatchable, the good ones have justifiably recevied the attention they deserve (generally, the studios tolerate fan films, as long as they don't make profit or slander the copyrighted properties). So, when a fellow Trek fan saw Cawley's set and suggested they team up and produce an online series, Cawley went for it, with the intention of creating a show honouring the vision and characters of the original Star Trek. And getting a cast and crew together proved surprisingly easy.

Star Trek: Phase II , named after an aborted 1970s Trek show, picks up where the Shatner series left off. It doesn't look like a fan production at all, despite being filmed in a shuttered New York car dealership. In fact, other than the CGI, it feels exactly like the 1960s Star Trek, from the sets to the performances; dialogue, music, costumes, the works. "We wanted you to be mentally transported back to 1969 as if the show had never been cancelled," says Cawley, who cast himself as Kirk. Unfortunately, for the first couple of episodes Captain Kirk had Elvis hair, and was inevitably mocked for it by viewers. "I tried to make everybody aware that I was performing as Elvis four shows a day at an amusement park, then had to drive home, eat, shower, change clothes then film until 4am, and do that every day for a week," says Cawley. "There was just no way I could do anything else. If I had kept my natural [blond] hair there would have been no income to make the show, so it was a trade-off."

The pilot was strong enough to attract support from Star Trek royalty: Eugene Rodenberry Jr, son of the show's creator, embraced it and now serves as "consulting producer", while - by way of a series of encounters and plaudits - actors from the original series have reprised their roles. Walter Koenig, who returned as Chekov, suggested a storyline that would allow him to play an older, and more insightful, version of the character. That episode was so well received, George Takei came on board to reprise an older Sulu, in a story that had already been written for the aborted 1970s series. His episode, World Enough And Time, was a landmark for the show. It was nominated for a Hugo Award (the sci-fi Oscars) alongside Battlestar Galactica and Doctor Who and convinced Buffy creator Joss Whedon to migrate to the net ("It was probably the best episode of the original Star Trek I'd ever seen," he said).

Phase II is, to all intents and purposes, a professional production, the only things missing are an official licence and any profits. And at a cost of around $45,000 per episode, Cawley admits it's a constant emptying of his pockets - a familiar complaint among fan film-makers. "We were trying to do everything we could for the cheapest we possibly could," says Shane Felux, a Virginian graphic designer who made the 40-minute mini-epic Star Wars: Revelations primarily so he could live in the Star Wars world for real, and thought he might be able to get some work out of it if it got enough attention. "I would barter a lot with other businesses, saying, 'If you let us use your 30-foot crane I'll build you a website in exchange.' I had to build so many websites!"

With a $20,000 budget, a crew of 200 and a three-year production, Revelations set new standards for fan films. "Our ambition was to do it the best we possibly could, no holds barred," says Felux. Once he'd got the cash (by way of credit cards and a home equity loan) and shot the film with friends, he used the raw footage to pitch his vision to amateur CGI artists worldwide, who jumped at the chance to showcase their work on something so ambitious, even if it was for free. The results were remarkable, with majestic cityscapes and stunning space battles accentuated by a grandiose score. Alas, the plot (something about a couple of warring women) is poor. Basically, it's great except for the bits which involve humans, but it raised the bar for subsequent productions, such as The Hunt For Gollum , a 45-minute opus based on a story found in the Lord Of The Rings appendices. It was shot with a small crew on a budget of £3,000, but looks like it cost a lot more. "The good thing about being a non-profit fan film is that we get everything for free," says the film's British director, 26-year-old Chris Bouchard. "We don't have to pay for people. All the budget went on the shoot, the props and costumes. Gandalf's beard was ridiculously expensive."

Bouchard shot the film's big set-piece in Epping Forest but tested the water with an initial shoot in north Wales, producing trailers with the footage to drum up interest from helpful parties. "Snowdonia was hard," he remembers. "Very wet and windy. We had problems with sheep getting in shot all the time."

For a trend which began as a bit of fun and games, fan film-making has since become a sizable threat to film studios. "Right now the studios are turning a blind eye", says Clive Young, author of the fan-film book Homemade Hollywood . "But I think that's going to have to change, because someone's gonna make something controversial, like a high-end Superman; one where he goes crazy on Kryptonite and starts killing babies."

But for now, fan film-makers are running riot, and the good ones are being rewarded. Troops' Kevin Rubio is now a writer on George Lucas's The Clone Wars. After Disney saw Revelations, they signed Shane Felux up to direct a TV show called Trenches. And James Cawley's been given the green light to produce an official online Buck Rogers. Phase II has had over 30m downloads, and Cawley is justifiably proud of it: "When one of our episodes premiered, it had more viewers than the Enterprise season premiere that year." Not bad for a bunch of amateurs.

Breakout fan films

Troops, 1997

Smart, funny and good looking Star Wars parody, this was the one that started it all. theforce.net/troops

Batman: Dead End, 2003

Lauded by Kevin "Clerks" Smith as "possibly the truest, best Batman movie ever".

collorastudios.com/projects/bde/bdemain.htm

Star Trek: Phase II, 2004-present

James Cawley's surprisingly good series gets better with each episode.

startreknewvoyages.com

Star Wars: Revelations, 2005

Shoddy film, but features near-Hollywood level CGI.

panicstruckpro.com/revelations/

The Hunt for Gollum, 2009

British Lord Of The Rings effort that looks almost as good as the real thing.

thehuntforgollum.com

• Science fiction and fantasy films

More on this story

Will Star Trek live long and prosper at the box office?

Who's who in JJ Abrams's Star Trek

Jj abrams's star trek: 'i went in fearing the worst, i came out a convert'.

JJ Abrams: 'I never got Star Trek'

Star Trek's Eric Bana: 'The film's almost made for the non-fan'

Most viewed.

How the Battle Over ‘Star Trek’ Rights Killed J.J. Abrams’ Grand Ambitions

The franchise's licensing and merchandising rights are split between CBS and Paramount which created headaches for the multihyphenate's production company Bad Robot

A struggle over the U.S.S. Enterprise's past and future helped sour J.J. Abrams on the "Star Trek" franchise and may have contributed to his decision to take on the "Star Wars" universe.

"Star Trek Into Darkness" arrives in U.S. multiplexes Thursday with tie-ins ranging from Bing to Hasbro. It is expected to gross more than $100 million at the domestic box office over the extended weekend. 

See photos: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Premiere: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana

Yet this marketing assault pales compared to the one that Abrams (above) and Bad Robot once envisioned for "Star Trek" and now plan to construct around the new "Star Wars" films.

A major stumbling block: "Star Trek's" licensing and merchandising rights are spread over two media conglomerates with competing goals. The rights to the original television series from the 1960s remained with CBS after it split off from Paramount’s corporate parent Viacom in 2006, while the studio retained the rights to the film series. CBS also held onto the ability to create future “Star Trek” TV shows.

Paramount must license the “Star Trek” characters from CBS Consumer Products for film merchandising.

Also read: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Review: Thrilling Sequel Balances Fun with a Post-9/11 Sensibility

Paramount declined to comment for this article and a spokesperson for Bad Robot did not respond to a request to comment.

"As the merchandising rights holder for Star Trek, CBS Consumer Products has ongoing relationships with all our partners, including Paramount," a spokesman for CBS Consumer Products said in a statement. "We have worked closely with them for the last five years to create merchandise to enhance the movies and satisfy fans. We are all looking forward to a successful opening of ‘Into Darkness.’”

Also read: 'Star Wars' 7, 8 and 9 Are 'The Most Exciting,' Says George Lucas Biographer (Exclusive)

"Why would that be attractive to an artist who sees beyond the boundaries of the silver screen to envision a true multi-platform narrative all based on a global franchise?”

Also read: Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher Back for 'Star Wars'? George Lucas Says Yes

"The derivative rights situation on 'Star Trek' is complicated because you’re dealing with cross-company cultures, so it makes it harder to implement a grand plan," Willenson said.

As for Disney's grand "Star Wars" plan, it's sounding an awful lot like the one Abrams once envisioned for "Star Trek." There will be television properties, theme park rides and spin-off films all centered around the new trilogy that Abrams will oversee.

It's a page borrowed from Disney's exploitation of the Marvel comic books and if it works out, it should make Abrams very rich indeed.

Incredible powers discovered/revealed on Star Trek that are used once and dismissed forever

In the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode “Elementary, Dear Data” (S2E3) it is revealed that the ship’s computer and holodeck are capable of literally creating sentient, intelligent life. While the character Moriarty reappears later in the series, that ability does not.

In the ST: TNG episode “Up the Long Ladder” (S2E18) it is revealed that Geordi La Forge can literally detect lies with his visor. Somehow this never comes up again in the series.

In Star Trek: Into Darkness Khan’s blood can seemingly literally cure death.

What are other incredible powers revealed in the Star Trek universe that are used once as a plot convenience, then are never seen again?

Actually, it does (sort of):

Terrible episode but you’d think even the dim bulbs running the Starfleet would recognize that they are dealing with a technology capable of creating and reproducing its own sapience. This is obviously an unintended side effect of creating a ship powered by a computer that is clearly manufacturing ‘complications’ to keep the crew occupied.

Spock’s extra eyelid.

That stuff is not lost. They have Top. Men. working on it.

Speaking of Vulcans, did pon farr ever get mentioned again in any Star Trek series or movie after its first appearance in an episode of the original series? It was supposed to affect every Vulcan every seven years, so we should have seen several examples of it in the canon.

At least once–T’Pol on Enterprise .

It also comes up in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock , and with Tuvok during an episode of Voyager .

In the first JJ Abrams movie, Scotty figures out a trans-warp transporter system allowing them to transport to the Enterprise which is presumably many lightyears away from them at the time.

There are several with the transporter. In one episode, some members of the TNG crew are turned into children but are restorted at the end of the episode thanks to their pattern being stored in the transporter or some such nonsense. Uh, why can’t you just repair any injury that way?

I saw Nimoy at a convention in the late 90s. He referred to Amok Time as, “that episode when Spock was in heat.”

Hell, in Voyager the crew figures out how to teleport anywhere in the entire universe instantaneously by breaking the Warp 10 barrier, and it never comes up again. Granted, it turns you into a giant salamander, but the Doctor was able to figure out how to completely cure that with absolutely no lingering physical or mental side effects.

In which it is subtly implied that Saavik is impregnated by the pubescent Spock. Ugh.

The less said about that unironic remake of Galaxy Quest , the better.

Say what you will about Enterprise or Discovery , but the real nadir of the Star Trek franchise was Voyager just in purely dire plotting and continuity.

Oh. Um, well, Q did it.

The one that bothered me as a kid was the super-speed/invisibility water from the original series episode “Wink of an Eye”. Why not keep a jug of that around in case of emergencies?

I always liked the bit where Nomad floated into engineering and did some tweaks (telekinetically, or whatever) and suddenly the Enterprise was going warp a zillion, and it freaked out Mr. Scott, so Kirk tells Nomad to put it back the way it was. And no one ever took a minute to check out what kind of changes Nomad made. What the hell will-was-be wrong with those people?

To be fair, this is one they don’t actually want to repeat. It makes sense they put in precautions to try and stop it. Not that it always works: sentient holograms do show up again. The Doctor in Voyager and Vic Fontaine both gain sentience, and Voyager winds up with a whole town of largely self-aware people.

When the character Moriarty reappears later in the series, doesn’t he repeat the feat for Regina?

MORIARTY: “If you loved a woman like this, Lieutenant, would you be content to let her remain a simulation?” BARCLAY: “You — You gave her consciousness? MORIARTY: “Yes, just as it was given to me.” BARCLAY: “Well I’m not so sure that’s a good idea.” MORIARTY: “Nonsense; it was the only thing to do.”

Also in Voyager, it’s referred to, when the Doctor is fantasizing about being a paragon: he treats Tuvok for pon farr, while singing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlNIxW_2l4E

a little number called “ponfaria” by the fans.

In “Plato’s Stepchildren” a simple injection can give humanoids telekinesis. Handy, don’t you think?

I think this one transcends the rest. It shows that reality itself is, well, flexible.

I just rewatched Remember Me, in which Dr Crusher creates her own entire universe, based in her thoughts. If she’d have had a bit more imagination, and not made her universe disappear along with Dr Quaice, she could have lived there forever. And she’d have never known.

Combine that with Yesterday’s Enterprise, Tapestry, and All Good Things…, and one can see reality as we know it is fragile and can be changed on a whim. AND that reality is determined by conscious thought.

This has large implications for understanding the nature of the universe.

Wasn’t it inside an unstable “warp bubble” that was collapsing though? I may be misremembering as you’ve certainly watched it more recently than I, but was the bubble itself within her control, or just what happened within it?

Yes, I believe it was Jean-Luc Picard who opined that their reality may be very much like the one in the holodeck: all of it may just be an elaborate simulation running inside a little device sitting on someone’s table.

Screen Rant

I'm glad star trek into darkness deleted kirk lying in his captain's log.

Star Trek Into Darkness deleted a scene where Captain Kirk lies in his Captain's log that painted Jim in a truly terrible light.

• Deleting the scene of Captain Kirk lying in his log was a wise move by J.J. Abrams, as it painted Kirk in a poor light.
• Spock emerges as the true hero in Star Trek Into Darkness, adhering to Starfleet values while Kirk falters repeatedly.
• Kirk's actions in the film make him harder to root for, as Spock shines in his ability to effectively manage escalating crises.

Star Trek Into Darkness deleted a scene in which Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) publicly lies in his Captain's log, which painted him in a terrible light. The second Star Trek reboot film directed by J.J. Abrams pits Kirk and the crew of the Starship Enterprise against two foes: the genetically engineered madman Khan Noonien Singh (Benedict Cumberbatch) and the diabolically corrupt Starfleet Admiral Alexander Marcus (Peter Weller). But in many ways, Captain Kirk's worst enemy in Star Trek Into Darkness is himself.

Before Captain Kirk tangled with Khan and Marcus to prevent all-out war the Klingons, Star Trek Into Darkness opened with the USS Enterprise's disastrous mission on the planet Nibiru. Ordered to simply survey the primitive world, Kirk allowed the natives to see the Starship Enterprise as he tried to rescue Commander Spock (Zachary Quinto) from a volcano. While Kirk's intentions to save Nirbiru from a planetary apocalypse were noble, Jim's reckless actions grossly violated Star Trek 's Prime Directive . Worse, Kirk lied about it.

Star Trek Into Darkness Ending & Problems Explained

Kirk lying in his captain's log in star trek into darkness' deleted scene makes him worse, falsifying a captain's log in front of his crew is indefensible..

A deleted scene from Star Trek Into Darkness posted by @AosdailyBTS on X shows Captain Kirk composing his Captain's log about the Nibiru mission on the bridge of the Starship Enterprise. Kirk blatantly lies about what transpired on Nibiru, claiming he "thought it wise to stay off the planet altogether" and calling the catastrophe "uneventful." Making matters worse, Captain Kirk spun his falsities and mockery of Starfleet's code of honor in full view of his appalled bridge crew . Check out the scene below:

J.J. Abrams was wise to leave this scene out of Star Trek Into Darkness' final cut. The arrogant way Kirk lies in his Captain's log is indefensible, and it casts James in a poor light. As it plays out in Star Trek Into Darkness , Kirk does lie in his log, and he's called out by Admiral Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood) immediately after Spock filed a truthful report in his log. But to actually see Kirk so flippantly lie in front of his crew is a blight on his character , and makes Kirk harder to root for in Star Trek Into Darkness.

Star Trek Into Darkness Made Spock A Better Enterprise Captain Than Kirk

Spock rose to the occasion in star trek into darkness.

In many ways, Chris Pine's young Captain Kirk is at his nadir in Star Trek Into Darkness, while Spock shines as the hero Kirk ought to be . Star Trek Into Darkness paints Spock as unable to "break a rule," but the Vulcan Science Officer acts honorably throughout the film, and maintains Starfleet's values while Captain Kirk repeatedly falters. It's Spock who told the truth about Nibiru because ethics demanded it, and Spock again successfully argued against the immorality of Kirk firing torpedoes to kill Khan instead of apprehending him for a trial.

Spock rose to the occasion and captured Khan with Lt. Nyota Uhura's (Zoe Saldana) help.

Kirk admitted to Spock that, "I have no idea what I'm supposed to do. I only know what I can do." Comparatively, the Vulcan didn't take a false step as he effectively managed Star Trek Into Darkness ' escalating crises. To Kirk's credit, he did align the Enterprise's warp core to save the ship , which led his (temporary) death by radiation poisoning. Without Kirk, Spock rose to the occasion and captured Khan with Lt. Nyota Uhura's (Zoe Saldana) help, bringing the madman to justice and resurrecting Kirk with Khan's "super blood." Vulcans cannot tell a lie, unlike Captain Kirk, and Star Trek Into Darkness was better for Spock doing what Kirk could not.

Source: @aosdailyBTS on X

Star Trek Into Darkness is streaming on Paramount+

• The Original Series
• The Animated Series
• The Next Generation
• Deep Space Nine
• Strange New Worlds
• Lower Decks
• Star Trek Movies
• TrekCore on Twitter
• TrekCore on Facebook

The now-tossed Star Trek 4 went through many iterations since the first announcement in July 2016 , including a story by legendary Hollywood director Quentin Tarantino, a surprise 2022 Kelvin cast announcement that apparently Chris Pine and company only learned about through the press, and prequel story set “decades before the 2009 film.”

Following the new Star Trek 5 announcement, star Chris Pine reportedly reacted “with a deep sigh” according to Deadline . “Chris is excited learn about this new film through today’s studio announcement,” said a representative for the actor, “because it went really well the last time this happened, right?”

Also expected for the Trek 5 reunion are co-stars Zachary Quinto (Spock), Zoe Saldana (Uhura), Simon Pegg (Scotty), Karl Urban (“Bones” McCoy), and John Cho (Sulu). Actor Anton Yelchin, who portrayed Chekov in the first three films, passed away in 2016.

While little is known about the planned story of this new film, sources close to Trek 5 development hear that Paramount is pursuing  Dune and  Wonka star Timothée Chalamet for the role of “Sybok,” half-brother of Spock, originated by actor Laurence Luckinbill in 1989.

• Behind The Scenes
• paramount pictures
• Star Trek 5

Related Stories

New star trek: discovery photos — “jinaal”, interview — sonequa martin-green on her star trek: discovery producer role, proudest moments, and more, vice press celebrates star trek: the original series with a new poster from artist lyndon willoughby, search news archives, new & upcoming releases, featured stories, our star trek: discovery season 5 spoiler-free review, star trek: discovery’s final adventure begins in april 2024, interview — star trek: lower decks’ mike mcmahan on moopsy, creating the orion homeworld, tuvix, and much more.

TrekCore.com is not endorsed, sponsored or affiliated with Paramount, CBS Studios, or the Star Trek franchise. All Star Trek images, trademarks and logos are owned by CBS Studios Inc. and/or Paramount. All original TrekCore.com content and the WeeklyTrek podcast (c) 2024 Trapezoid Media, LLC. · Terms & Conditions

The Future of ‘Star Trek’: From ‘Starfleet Academy’ to New Movies and Michelle Yeoh, How the 58-Year-Old Franchise Is Planning for the Next Generation of Fans

“I can’t believe I get to play the captain of the Enterprise.”

“Strange New Worlds” is the 12th “Star Trek” TV show since the original series debuted on NBC in 1966, introducing Gene Roddenberry’s vision of a hopeful future for humanity. In the 58 years since, the “Star Trek” galaxy has logged 900 television episodes and 13 feature films, amounting to 668 hours — nearly 28 days — of content to date. Even compared with “Star Wars” and the Marvel Cinematic Universe, “Star Trek” stands as the only storytelling venture to deliver a single narrative experience for this long across TV and film.

In other words, “Star Trek” is not just a franchise. As Alex Kurtzman , who oversees all “Star Trek” TV production, puts it, “‘Star Trek’ is an institution.”

Without a steady infusion of new blood, though, institutions have a way of fading into oblivion (see soap operas, MySpace, Blockbuster Video). To keep “Star Trek” thriving has meant charting a precarious course to satisfy the fans who have fueled it for decades while also discovering innovative ways to get new audiences on board.

“Doing ‘Star Trek’ means that you have to deliver something that’s entirely familiar and entirely fresh at the same time,” Kurtzman says.

The franchise has certainly weathered its share of fallow periods, most recently after “Nemesis” bombed in theaters in 2002 and UPN canceled “Enterprise” in 2005. It took 12 years for “Star Trek” to return to television with the premiere of “Discovery” in 2017; since then, however, there has been more “Star Trek” on TV than ever: The adventure series “Strange New Worlds,” the animated comedy “Lower Decks” and the kids series “Prodigy” are all in various stages of production, and the serialized thriller “Picard” concluded last year, when it ranked, along with “Strange New Worlds,” among Nielsen’s 10 most-watched streaming original series for multiple weeks. Nearly one in five Paramount+ subscribers in the U.S. is watching at least one “Star Trek” series, according to the company, and more than 50% of fans watching one of the new “Trek” shows also watch at least two others. The new shows air in 200 international markets and are dubbed into 35 languages. As “Discovery” launches its fifth and final season in April, “Star Trek” is in many ways stronger than it’s ever been.

“’Star Trek’s fans have kept it alive more times than seems possible,” says Eugene Roddenberry, Jr., who executive produces the TV series through Roddenberry Entertainment. “While many shows rightfully thank their fans for supporting them, we literally wouldn’t be here without them.”

But the depth of fan devotion to “Star Trek” also belies a curious paradox about its enduring success: “It’s not the largest fan base,” says Akiva Goldsman, “Strange New Worlds” executive producer and co-showrunner. “It’s not ‘Star Wars.’ It’s certainly not Marvel.”

When J.J. Abrams rebooted “Star Trek” in 2009 — with Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and Zoe Saldaña playing Kirk, Spock and Uhura — the movie grossed more than any previous “Star Trek” film by a comfortable margin. But neither that film nor its two sequels broke $500 million in global grosses, a hurdle every other top-tier franchise can clear without breaking a sweat.

There’s also the fact that “Star Trek” fans are aging. I ask “The Next Generation” star Jonathan Frakes, who’s acted in or directed more versions of “Star Trek” than any other person alive, how often he meets fans for whom the new “Star Trek” shows are their first. “Of the fans who come to talk to me, I would say very, very few,” he says. “‘Star Trek’ fans, as we know, are very, very, very loyal — and not very young.”

As Stapf puts it: “There’s a tried and true ‘Trek’ fan that is probably going to come to every ‘Star Trek,’ no matter what it is — and we want to expand the universe.”

Every single person I spoke to for this story talked about “Star Trek” with a joyful earnestness as rare in the industry as (nerd alert) a Klingon pacifist.

“When I’m meeting fans, sometimes they’re coming to be confirmed, like I’m kind of a priest,” Ethan Peck says during a break in filming on the “Strange New Worlds” set. He’s in full Spock regalia — pointy ears, severe eyebrows, bowl haircut — and when asked about his earliest memories of “Star Trek,” he stares off into space in what looks like Vulcan contemplation. “I remember being on the playground in second or third grade and doing the Vulcan salute, not really knowing where it came from,” he says. “When I thought of ‘Star Trek,’ I thought of Spock. And now I’m him. It’s crazy.”

To love “Star Trek” is to love abstruse science and cowboy diplomacy, complex moral dilemmas and questions about the meaning of existence. “It’s ultimately a show with the most amazing vision of optimism, I think, ever put on-screen in science fiction,” says Kurtzman, who is 50. “All you need is two minutes on the news to feel hopeless now. ‘Star Trek’ is honestly the best balm you could ever hope for.”

I’m getting a tour of the USS Enterprise from Scotty — or, rather, “Strange New World” production designer Jonathan Lee, who is gushing in his native Scottish burr as we step into the starship’s transporter room. “I got such a buzzer from doing this, I can’t tell you,” he says. “I actually designed four versions of it.”

Lee is especially proud of the walkway he created to run behind the transporter pads — an innovation that allows the production to shoot the characters from a brand-new set of angles as they beam up from a far-flung planet. It’s one of the countless ways that this show has been engineered to be as cinematic as possible, part of Kurtzman’s overall vision to make “Star Trek” on TV feel like “a movie every week.”

Kurtzman’s tenure with “Star Trek” began with co-writing the screenplay for Abrams’ 2009 movie, which was suffused with a fast-paced visual style that was new to the franchise. When CBS Studios approached Kurtzman in the mid-2010s about bringing “Star Trek” back to TV, he knew instinctively that it needed to be just as exciting as that film.

“The scope was so much different than anything we had ever done on ‘Next Gen,’” says Frakes, who’s helmed two feature films with the “Next Generation” cast and directed episodes of almost every live-action “Trek” TV series, including “Discovery” and “Strange New Worlds.” “Every department has the resources to create.”

A new science lab set for Season 3, for example, boasts a transparent floor atop a four-foot pool of water that swirls underneath the central workbench, and the surrounding walls sport a half dozen viewscreens with live schematics custom designed by a six-person team. “I like being able to paint on a really big canvas,” Kurtzman says. “The biggest challenge is always making sure that no matter how big something gets, you’re never losing focus on that tiny little emotional story.”

At this point, is there a genre that “Strange New Worlds” can’t do? “As long as we’re in storytelling that is cogent and sure handed, I’m not sure there is,” Goldsman says with an impish smile. “Could it do Muppets? Sure. Could it do black and white, silent, slapstick? Maybe!”

This approach is also meant to appeal to people who might want to watch “Star Trek” but regard those 668 hours of backstory as an insurmountable burden. “You shouldn’t have to watch a ‘previously on’ to follow our show,” Myers says.

To achieve so many hairpin shifts in tone and setting while maintaining Kurtzman’s cinematic mandate, “Strange New Worlds” has embraced one of the newest innovations in visual effects: virtual production. First popularized on the “Star Wars” series “The Mandalorian,” the technology — called the AR wall — involves a towering circular partition of LED screens projecting a highly detailed, computer-generated backdrop. Rather than act against a greenscreen, the actors can see whatever fantastical surroundings their characters are inhabiting, lending a richer level of verisimilitude to the show.

But there is a catch. While the technology is calibrated to maintain a proper sense of three-dimensional perspective through the camera lens, it can be a bit dizzying for anyone standing on the set. “The images on the walls start to move in a way that makes no sense,” says Mount. “You end up having to focus on something that’s right in front of you so you don’t fall down.”

And yet, even as he’s talking about it, Mount can’t help but break into a boyish grin. “Sometimes we call it the holodeck,” he says. In fact, the pathway to the AR wall on the set is dotted with posters of the virtual reality room from “The Next Generation” and the words “Enter Holodeck” in a classic “Trek” font.

“I want to take one of those home with me,” Peck says. Does the AR wall also affect him? “I don’t really get disoriented by it. Spock would not get ill, so I’m Method acting.”

I’m on the set of the “Star Trek” TV movie “Section 31,” seated in an opulent nightclub with a view of a brilliant, swirling nebula, watching Yeoh rehearse with director Olatunde Osunsanmi and her castmates. Originally, the project was announced as a TV series centered on Philippa Georgiou, the semi-reformed tyrant Yeoh originated on “Discovery.” But between COVID delays and the phenomenon of “Everything Everywhere All at Once,” there wasn’t room in the veteran actress’s schedule to fit a season of television. Yeoh was undaunted.

“We’d never let go of her,” she says of her character. “I was just blown away by all the different things I could do with her. Honestly, it was like, ‘Let’s just get it done, because I believe in this.’”

If that means nothing to you, don’t worry: The enormity of the revelation that Garrett is being brought back is meant only for fans. If you don’t know who the character is, you’re not missing anything.

“It was always my goal to deliver an entertaining experience that is true to the universe but appeals to newcomers,” says screenwriter Craig Sweeny. “I wanted a low barrier of entry so that anybody could enjoy it.”

Nevertheless, including Garrett on the show is exactly the kind of gasp-worthy detail meant to flood “Star Trek” fans with geeky good feeling.

“You cannot create new fans to the exclusion of old fans,” Kurtzman says. “You must serve your primary fan base first and you must keep them happy. That is one of the most important steps to building new fans.”

On its face, that maxim would make “Section 31” a genuine risk. The titular black-ops organization has been controversial with “Star Trek” fans since it was introduced in the 1990s. “The concept is almost antagonistic to some of the values of ‘Star Trek,’” Sweeny says. But he still saw “Section 31” as an opportunity to broaden what a “Star Trek” project could be while embracing the radical inclusivity at the heart of the franchise’s appeal.

“Famously, there’s a spot for everybody in Roddenberry’s utopia, so I was like, ‘Well, who would be the people who don’t quite fit in?’” he says. “I didn’t want to make the John le Carré version, where you’re in the headquarters and it’s backbiting and shades of gray. I wanted to do the people who were at the edges, out in the field. These are not people who necessarily work together the way you would see on a ‘Star Trek’ bridge.”

For Osunsanmi, who grew up watching “The Next Generation” with his father, it boils down to a simple question: “Is it putting good into the world?” he asks. “Are these characters ultimately putting good into the world? And, taking a step back, are we putting good into the world? Are we inspiring humans watching this to be good? That’s for me what I’ve always admired about ‘Star Trek.’”

Should “Section 31” prove successful, Yeoh says she’s game for a sequel. And Kurtzman is already eyeing more opportunities for TV movies, including a possible follow-up to “Picard.” The franchise’s gung-ho sojourn into streaming movies, however, stands in awkward contrast to the persistent difficulty Paramount Pictures and Abrams’ production company Bad Robot have had making a feature film following 2016’s “Star Trek Beyond” — the longest theaters have gone without a “Star Trek” movie since Paramount started making them.

First, a movie reuniting Pine’s Capt. Kirk with his late father — played in the 2009 “Star Trek” by Chris Hemsworth — fell apart in 2018. Around the same time, Quentin Tarantino publicly flirted with, then walked away from, directing a “Star Trek” movie with a 1930s gangster backdrop. Noah Hawley was well into preproduction on a “Star Trek” movie with a brand-new cast, until then-studio chief Emma Watts abruptly shelved it in 2020. And four months after Abrams announced at Paramount’s 2022 shareholders meeting that his 2009 cast would return for a movie directed by Matt Shakman (“WandaVision”), Shakman left the project to make “The Fantastic Four” for Marvel. (It probably didn’t help that none of the cast had been approached before Abrams made his announcement.)

The studio still intends to make what it’s dubbed the “final chapter” for the Pine-Quinto-Saldaña cast, and Steve Yockey (“The Flight Attendant”) is writing a new draft of the script. Even further along is another prospective “Star Trek” film written by Seth Grahame-Smith (“Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter”) and to be directed by Toby Haynes (“Andor,” “Black Mirror: USS Callister”) that studio insiders say is on track to start preproduction by the end of the year. That project will serve as an origin story of sorts for the main timeline of the entire franchise. In both cases, the studio is said to be focused on rightsizing the budgets to fit within the clear box office ceiling for “Star Trek” feature films.

Far from complaining, everyone seems to relish the challenge. Visual effects supervisor Jason Zimmerman says that “working with Alex, the references are always at least $100 million movies, if not more, so we just kind of reverse engineer how do we do that without having to spend the same amount of money and time.”

The workload doesn’t seem to faze him either. “Visual effects people are a big, big ‘Star Trek’ fandom,” he says. “You naturally just get all these people who go a little bit above and beyond, and you can’t trade that for anything.”

In one of Kurtzman’s several production offices in Toronto, he and production designer Matthew Davies are scrutinizing a series of concept drawings for the newest “Star Trek” show, “Starfleet Academy.” A bit earlier, they showed me their plans for the series’ central academic atrium, a sprawling, two-story structure that will include a mess hall, amphitheater, trees, catwalks, multiple classrooms and a striking view of the Golden Gate Bridge in a single, contiguous space. To fit it all, they plan to use every inch of Pinewood Toronto’s 45,900 square foot soundstage, the largest in Canada.

But this is a “Star Trek” show, so there do need to be starships, and Kurtzman is discussing with Davies about how one of them should look. The issue is that “Starfleet Academy” is set in the 32nd century, an era so far into the future Kurtzman and his team need to invent much of its design language.

“For me, this design is almost too Klingon,” Kurtzman says. “I want to see the outline and instinctively, on a blink, recognize it as a Federation ship.”

The time period was first introduced on Season 3 of “Discovery,” when the lead character, Michael Burnham (Sonequa Martin-Green), transported the namesake starship and its crew there from the 23rd century. “It was exciting, because every time we would make a decision, we would say, ‘And now that’s canon,’” says Martin-Green.

“We listened to a lot of it,” Kurtzman says. “I think I’ve been able to separate the toxic fandom from really true fans who love ‘Star Trek’ and want you to hear what they have to say about what they would like to see.”

By Season 2, the “Discovery” writers pivoted from its dour, war-torn first season and sent the show on its trajectory 900-plus years into the future. “We had to be very aware of making sure that Spock was in the right place and that Burnham’s existence was explained properly, because she was never mentioned in the original series,” says executive producer and showrunner Michelle Paradise. “What was fun about jumping into the future is that it was very much fresh snow.”

That freedom affords “Starfleet Academy” far more creative latitude while also dramatically reducing how much the show’s target audience of tweens and teens needs to know about “Star Trek” before watching — which puts them on the same footing as the students depicted in the show. “These are kids who’ve never had a red alert before,” Noga Landau, executive producer and co-showrunner, says. “They never had to operate a transporter or be in a phaser fight.”

In the “Starfleet Academy” writers’ room in Secret Hideout’s Santa Monica offices, Kurtzman tells the staff — a mix of “Star Trek” die-hards, part-time fans and total newbies — that he wants to take a 30,000-foot view for a moment. “I think we need to ground in science more throughout the show,” he says, a giant framed photograph of Spock ears just over his shoulder. “The kids need to use science more to solve problems.”

Immediately, one of the writers brightens. “Are you saying we can amp up the techno-babble?” she says. “I’m just excited I get to use my computer science degree.”

After they break for lunch, Kurtzman is asked how much longer he plans to keep making “Star Trek.” 

“The minute I fall out of love with it is the minute that it’s not for me anymore. I’m not there yet,” he says. “To be able to build in this universe to tell stories that are fundamentally about optimism and a better future at a time when the world seems to be falling apart — it’s a really powerful place to live every day.”

More From Our Brands

Mia goth’s quest for fame runs into a serial killer, her past in new ‘maxxxine’ trailer, de bethune packs 8 complications into a new double-sided masterpiece, irs letter an ‘indictment’ of nil collectives’ exempt status, the best loofahs and body scrubbers, according to dermatologists, s.w.a.t.’s kenny johnson: a longtime friendship with shemar moore helped fuel luca’s emotional farewell, verify it's you, please log in.

Alice Eve Redid Her Star Trek Into Darkness Audition Almost 20 Times

J.J. Abrams' 2013 film "Star Trek Into Darkness" was a parallel universe retread of Nicholas Meyer's 1982 film "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan." In Abrams' movie, the central villain, Khan Noonien Singh, was played by Benedict Cumberbatch, while in Meyer's film, Khan was played by Ricardo Montalbán. Both films feature the death of Kirk and/or Spock, and both films feature the survivor yelling "Khaaaaan!" The plots of the films differ, however, as Khan remains the central villain of the 1982 film, while he was supplanted by a vengeful Admiral Marcus (Peter Weller) in "Into Darkness."

Both films also feature Dr. Carol Marcus, a paramour of Captain Kirk (Chris Pine in "Into Darkness" and William Shatner in "Wrath of Khan"). In "Star Trek Into Darkness," Dr. Marcus was played by Alice Eve, taking over for Bibi Besch in "Wrath of Khan." Because the characters in "Into Darkness" are younger than they were in "Wrath of Khan," Kirk and Dr. Marcus don't yet have their son, David. Dr. Marcus was also transformed from a benevolent scientist into a Starfleet officer proficient in weapons technology.

Eve was happy to audition for the role of Carol Marcus, although it seems her audition was a wonderful yet harrowing experience. During  a Build Series interview in 2019 , Eve revealed that she received the call to play Dr. Marcus while she was driving in her car and that she had to pull over. When it came time to actually audition, however, Eve said she was heavily directed by Abrams, explaining that she had to read certain sections over and over and over again.

Getting the call

Eve said that she received a frantic call from her agent revealing that Abrams was about to call. Sure enough, two minutes later, Abrams called her directly. Eve knew that "Star Trek" was a big deal and safely pulled her car off the road to talk to him. The next step was the audition and boy, did it seem difficult. According to Eve:

"I must have done it 17 times in a row in the room with J.J. Like, various different ways. I was heavily auditioned for that role, yeah. But [I] really enjoyed auditioning for him. Sometimes it's not fun to audition, but with J.J it felt a little bit more like a workshop and a work in progress rather than a test. [...H]e's always doing that and he's very amenable. And so in the middle of it, if I didn't like it, I'd be like, 'No, no, I want to go again.' 'Yeah, yeah, go again! Yeah, yeah, yeah, go again! Yeah, yeah, yeah.' It was very kind of [inter]active, the process."

The Dr. Marcus in "Into Darkness," as noted, is a wholly different character from the one seen in "Wrath of Khan," so Abrams and Eve were able to, essentially, create her from scratch. This also allowed Dr. Marcus' father to play a major part in the film despite not being mentioned in "Wrath of Khan."

Sadly, just as Carol Marcus didn't appear in "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock," nor did she appear in the "Into Darkness" sequel "Star Trek Beyond." A pity; Eve did an exemplary job in the role, even if it was only a small one.

The underwear controversy

There was some controversy to the Dr. Marcus character as she was depicted in "Into Darkness," specifically in a scene wherein she had to change uniforms in Kirk's presence, with the camera being careful to catch a glimpse of her in her underthings. (Strangely, it seems brassiere technology won't change much from the 21st to the 23rd centuries.) The shot was clearly included for mere titillation's sake, and there was criticism of it upon the release of "Into Darkness." Abrams admitted he understood the criticism, and co-writer/producer Damon Lindelof even apologized for it . 

Eve, however, did not feel exploited in any way, and she was happy to shoot the underwear scene. Speaking to Inverse in 2021 , she explained:

"It was something I voluntarily worked with a trainer to be fit for, was very much prepared for, and very much enjoyed [doing] — filming, executing, promoting. [...] The feeling I shouldn't have done it, or that it was exploitation, was confusing to me. [...] There are many things in the world that are confusing. I put it down to one of those anomalies. I'm proud of that scene, and all the work I did." 

Despite the cheesecake moment, Dr. Marcus was still presented in "Into Darkness" as expert, professional, and capable. She's not hung up on Kirk and doesn't define herself by her relationship with a man. "Sci-fi is cool because it shows powerful women," Eve said.  " They're working for their passion." Dr. Marcus was, to her, a powerful woman whom she got to workshop with her director. There was, it seems, nothing to regret.

Alice Eve’s Intense Audition Process for Star Trek Into Darkness

T he talented actress Alice Eve shared the riveting details of her audition process for the role in “Star Trek Into Darkness,” which was nothing short of an odyssey. When her agent tipped her off about the imminent call from director J.J. Abrams, Eve ensured she was safely parked before taking the life-changing call. She was very aware of the franchise’s magnitude and the importance of the conversation she was about to have.

Speaking of the auditions, Eve reflected on them with ardor, saying: “I must have done it 17 times in a row in the room with J.J. [Abrams]… various different ways. I was heavily auditioned for that role, yeah. But [I] really enjoyed auditioning for him. Auditions aren’t always enjoyable, but with J.J. it was like a workshop—fluid and open to exploration. […] He’s always up for trying things out. And so in the middle of it, if I wasn’t happy, I’d just say, ‘No, no, I want to go again.’ And he would respond, ‘Yeah, yeah, go again! Yeah, yeah, yeah, go again!’ So it really was an [inter]active, dynamic process.”

The character Dr. Marcus in “Into Darkness” was created with a fresh perspective, differing from her “Wrath of Khan” counterpart. This reinvention allowed for a new dynamic and even included Dr. Marcus’ father as a crucial character in the film—someone not referenced in “Wrath of Khan.”

Unfortunately, as Carol Marcus was absent from “Star Trek III: The Search for Spock,” she likewise did not return for the “Into Darkness” sequel “Star Trek Beyond.” Despite the limited screen time, Eve’s portrayal remains noteworthy.

FAQ – Alice Eve’s Star Trek Into Darkness Audition

The behind-the-scenes glimpse of Alice Eve’s elaborate audition process offers a testament to the rigorous efforts and collaboration that go into casting major film roles, especially within iconic franchises such as “Star Trek.” Eve’s dedication to her craft and her commitment to working hands-on with the director highlights the intricate nature of bringing a character to life on screen. Despite her role’s brevity and absence in the following sequel, Alice Eve’s portrayal of Dr. Carol Marcus in “Star Trek Into Darkness” remains a significant contribution to the sci-fi series.