"the engines look like......pregnant worms." well, if a guy drives a car with a big engine, it`s said that he needs it for "some compensation". The person wich is responsible for that warp engines needs obviously a lot compensation. ;-)
God Star Trek : The Motion Picture sucks balls sooo hard..almost felt asleep in front of it (on tv). This lame, cheesy crap hasn't much to do with the wittyness, rythm, and intelligent coherence of Picard's show or even Abrams'version (which is truely a good revival). Essentially, anything Star Trekish is better in every aspect than all those movies with Kirk and cie ( ok, Unknown Land something was allright).
I'm a TNG fan, but the thing I loved about the Original cast movies is how they made the Enterprise one of the characters -- you had the sense that she was being pushed to her limits and, at times, was only being held together by the ingenuity of Scotty.
For FUCK SAKE!! QUIT COMPLAINING SAYING "In the Reboot the ships too big!!" and? Who cares. "The reboot is shit" Why are you watching this then?! "The time lines all wrong!!" Pay attention to when this is set. "J.J is crap" The one thing I can agree on.
The 2009 Enterprise looks like a pelican. I hate the design they came up with. They could even agree as to how big it was. That shows piss poor planning. It barely retained the original shape in the secondary hull and the engines look like......pregnant worms. The Enterprise refit in 1,2 & 3 was the best design for the ship.
@TheReturningShadow So what ud rather the original or refit? It would be laughable to see a modern film presenting the future with blocky computers and CRT displays. The refit and A were not too bad but the interior of the original was like a plastic shed. Say what u want about remake exterior but they nailed the modern day futuristic concept interior beautifully.
@akouzov The computer displays and such were just fine in terms of technology, however it was a little over the top as to the amount crammed into the the bridge. And also the main screen was NEVER a front window on ANY Enterprise until this movie and the bridge NEVER exited to hallway. It's ALWAYS an elevator. There are just too many inconsistencies with this Enterprise. To me everything about it just looks bad due to bad planning.
@TheReturningShadow Shat I'm about to comment about what you wrote is not an endorsement of the new REnterprise. The Enterprise D had a door that emptied into a hallway, the ready room, the briefing room & lift. The original Enterprise had a door that exited to a hall way as well as the turbo lift. The refit had 2 turbo lifts and a door that exit to a hallway. This is from the official blue prints.
@Trekfreek I understand your thoughts on the Enterprise-D bridge. However the exterior followed that blueprint. I also have seen blueprints of the original and refit and I never saw a door opening to a hallway, only turbolifts and turbolifts that also open to the rear airlock, but the exterior visuals always matched what the shown on the interiors. This movie doesn't. The ext. is like the refit dish but the interior shows hallways off to the side of the bridge. Continuity Errors.
@TheReturningShadow I'm not arguing the problems with the new movie. I HATE the new movie. I'm only pointing out that your comment about the bridge is wrong. You must have seen the wrong blue prints. I have the original official Blue prints of both the Enterprise in TOS and TMP. What I told you is 100% right. On NCC 1701 there is a never seen cramped corridor on the side of the bridge that leads to a repair panel behind all of the bridges computers & view screen.
In 1979 the Refit design was years ahead of its time, they did something right, they created a legend.................. No comment on the new "E", I just don't get it, I tried to! You can't replace the original, the classic, why would you even try...................
@subron6er refit/A was better than TOS hands down. Just not sure that FLAT nacelles were that good really. My favourite enterprise nacelles are hands down ENTERPRISE E. Beautiful. Futuristic. Detailed and Threatening.
My #1 problem with the new one is it effectively kills the Star Trek genre dead in it's tracks. If TNG demonstrated anything it's that The Great Bird's vision had to continue forward. Going backwards in Enterprise - as well done a show as it was -, was a major mistake IMO. Are there no new minds who can come up with NEW characters? They had to steal the old characters and ideas? Star Trek is dead in space right now. I want it back - in a time period AFTER Voyager's return to the Alpha Quadrant.
@VONNAIR I'm not real fond of the proliferaition of time travel in ST. It's overused in my opinion and isn't what Roddenberry envisioned as a future anyway. To me Star Trek was always about a CONTINUING future, an unknown future where we all worked together to learn, to explore new things. IMO a new timeline just puts different clothing on old ideas. The genre is stagnant because it's frozen after the Dominion War and no one is smart or brave enough to figure out a way to move it forward.
i agree with everyone...jj abrahms enterprise left a lot to be desired...but to quote capt. kirk.."young minds , fresh ideas , be tolerant!" that was from ST3
Sorry but the new JJ product is an ungainly, blobby, melty and disproportionate pig of a starship design. It's absolutely awful, much like his film just has no good content, action or true star trek feeling.
New isn't always better, sometimes new is just new.
@Foxx1981 I strongly suspect that if the Abrams design had been the one used from the very beginning of Star Trek, nobody would have a problem with it. They'd think it was sleek, they'd think it was cool, and would wax nostalgia over it. And if they tried to introduce, say, the design used for the Enterprise-A, it would be called "too blocky" and "unaerodynamic".
Basically what I'm trying to say is you seem to be taking out your hatred of the reboot in general on this ship.
@monkeyhanger83 Never sad. Pissed off and extremely disappointed that Paramount would allow the franchise to go in this direction is more like it. Face it boy, everything about this movie was nothing but a juvenile shitfest!
@Actionguy1 I genuinely don't get why so many trekkers out there HATE the film??
Trek was dying long before 2009, mainly bcos enterprise failed due again trekkers who wouldn't accept it as it a prequel that simply tried to address the MANY continuity errors in trek cannon, i.e the klingon foreheads!
Paramount and abrams gave trek a new lease of life by taking it in a new direction.
Kirk and TOS was always THE most popular of the trek franchises but we couldn't have the original 6movies re-done
why couldn´t they do something with the Enterprise B??there was plenty of gap to fill between Kirk and Picard..and there would be no historic design conflicts.. o.O
why rewrite StarTrek history in such stupid way..? the bridge of the Enterprise looks far more modern than the Enterprise-E´s..all shiny and with crystal clear displays..it is at least supposed to be dark and computed somwhere between Enterprise NX and Enterprise from the first movie..
@Spionsilver Remember Capt. Herrimann and Enterprise-B? He had a full bridge crew all nice and ready to take over....better HIM than that three season farce w/ Bakula. And THIS shit, JJ's fistfuck, was the deathknell of our dream.
First of all, desing is not a word. I recognize you may have been VERY impassioned when writing it, but... yeah. In any case, I thought that it was very DIFFERENT. Not necessarily better, but simply trying to separate itself from the original. Which is actually a good idea for any reboot.
The original was good, but I like the reboot as well. And I'm quite excited for the sequel.
I think the biggest disappointment of the '09 movie was the departure from the original series. A movie like Abram's was talked about for decades, so I think many were expecting to see all of the original series' concepts maintained, but were not. The departures are too much for me. The new ship is ugly. And the characters, not the actors mind you, but the characters are all wrong. Indeed, it is an alternate universe Trek.
we wont hate the new one if jj abrams didnt ruin the concept, its not about the changes, its about the concept of star trek. they can make a better movie with better effects but stay with the concept! ex: a ship registry never started with 0. warp necelle is not a jet intake! it ruins everything! why jj made another movie about kirk again? there's another enterprise, enterprise-b? or C? that havent been told yet.
@RianputraF erm...didn't Enterprise C get destoyed by the Romulans while she attempted to defend a Klingon out post against a sudden Romulan attack? (Yesterday's Enterprise, TNG.) And wasn't the B the Enterprise being launched at the beginning of Generations? Oops, sorry, never feed a Trekkie past midnight. : D
the new one is way better...that old one was made back then....if they had the tech of what we have today back then, the enterprise would look like todays. ppl need to stop living in the past look towards the future. everything changes!
The 09 movie fucked up 45 years of history. They couldent even get vulcan right for Christ sake. That new ship is a polished turd. Matt Jeffries would be spinning in his grave if he saw what they called the Enterprise in 2009.
@irontusk341 That depends on the change. For example, we've had "change" for over two years now, and it ain't working. Why change something that works? Why didn't Abrams come up with his own story concept of a large spaceship traveling around the galaxy seeking out new life instead of 're-imagining' Star Trek? Answer 1: Him and the other young upstarts in Hollywood lack the imagination to create new, fresh ideas. 2: It guaranteed him a big paycheck.
@irontusk341 That depends on the change. For example, we've had "change" for over two years now, and it ain't working. Why change something that works? Why didn't Abrams come up with his own story concept of a large spaceship traveling around the galaxy seeking out new life instead of 're-imagining' Star Trek? Answer 1: Him and the other young upstarts in Hollywood lack the imagination to create new, fresh ideas. 2: It guaranteed him a big paycheck.
made secondary hull look too small almost like it was just an after thought. nacelle struts should not be curving like they are here remember engineering crew needs easy access ot nacelles.bridge suppose it's own deck, nacelles are too long, they trail off way too far to the back. shuttle bay should not be cluttered as is depicted in movie, bad enough having to land in clear confine space real headache having to manuver shuttle around all piping and structural fittings
The new Enterprise is sexy! I may be one of the few Trek fans who love it, but I'm proud of it! Hopefully though the sequel will restore some of the intelligence. JJ's Star Trek was fun, but it could've been better.
the only way the new ship looks good is if you completely ignore classic star trek ship design everything from 1701-1701-E even then its still garbage
You hardcore Trekkies go suck Shatners dick. So fucking picky. New enterprise is way cooler looking then the original. TMP enterprise looked exactly like the 170-A minus the a. But they're all cool in their own way. What if gene rodenberry had made the refit of the TOS one look like that? You'd think it was the shit cuz he made it. Well he's dead. JJ is tryin to bring Trek back in a new direction. You don't like it don't watch. Go play with you trek dolls on your basement
Once, when I was really sick, I had to shit into a bucket because I couldn't reach the toilet in time. First, there was these three long logs that plopped into the bucket. Then, when the hard stuff had cleared out, I started to shit out this mushy, muddy stuff, which pooled up at the end of the three logs and made a big circle. My pile of shit was a better looking Enterprise than the JJ Abrams one. Fuck you, JJ.
I liked the refit version of the Enterprise better. I loved the "beauty shots". Gorgeous. This new version is okay, but just okay. The nacelles look really stupid, and I hate the tapered end of the ship. Makes it look like Starfleet ran out of money to build the ship and had to improvise, lol.
Old IS gold. But new is inspiring. You cant not help to love the old Enterprise, Shes got all the nostalgy and history of star trek with in her. But the new one is also very very cool in its own remade way, I like it, I think its a huge hit. Even the good old Captain Kirk Aka William S. Liked it.. It has the form, the details look better in some ways, in other ways not. I cant wait to see a refit version of it. In this video its compared to the Refitted Enterprise. Not the Orginal one.:)
@Alorrana Yeah you're right, I agree with you, I like the new one too. But this is only a comparison between the motion pictures, 1979 to 2009. Maybe I will make another one with the USS Enterprise of 1966, The Original-Original :)
@Alorrana you really think shatner is going to tell people what a load of crap the new design. it's typical hollywood etiquette to bs about somthing that stinks
I would just like to say the new Trek was the highest grossing of all of the movies... I hardly think that this ship has destroyed the franchise... in fact I think it is saving it. Yes, I may not be the biggest fan of the new design, but whatever... If you don't like it, just destroy your copy of the movie... Don't watch the next one... If I don't like a movie I don't buy it, but something tells me all of you people who say you hate it have a copy... probably on BR. I for one can't wait for XII
Enterprise was built in a spacedock, not in a corn field in Iowa. Abrams really dropped the ball on this one. Now, we have to wait another 10 years before we a reboot. Thanks JJ, you freakin' douche bag!
The new Alternate time line Universe Big - E? It looks like an over sized Toilet to match its cast, and Vulcan destroyed?, gimme a break, where was Kirkd best friend Gary Mitchell?
please FLUSH new ship and move, horrible comparisons!, I would still take The Wrath of Khan any day over any of the other movies but love First Contact too!, oh yeah and The Undiscovered Country and Nemesis!! damn now they have ruined Trek AGAIN!!!
@Utubetrekk you think Undiscovered country ruined trek, what about 5 I can't even watch it. Nemesis was pretty poo apart from the Reman Scimitar was lush :)
@Zorolord ST6 had so many wonderfully complex layers involving story, politics, characters and social commentary that I get something different from it every time I watch it.
ST5 was rubbish, I agree - even Roddenberry himself rejected it.
Nemesis wasn't bad, but you could tell it was written by a fanboy and not someone who was trying to tell a real story. Plus, the writer failed his fanboy card by making Picard bald in the Academy - in "Tapestry" he clearly had a mop of brown hair...
Well, I like both versions. THe original because, well duh it's the first to boldy go (pardon the pun) while the new version has some pretty interesting prospects. As for why this looks this or that, remember, alternate timeline. one of the reasons why things are the way they are is perhaps what the kelvin survivors brought back with them helped to shape starship designs and defenses. It's a cop out, yeah, but it's all relative and I love it all.
I prefer the 2009 Enterprise. Especially the interior - the old sets don't look futuristic anymore. The new ship just looks like it belongs to the future.
I say they should make a new series with the whole "Your timeline is now screwed up!" thing using the actors from the new movie (well some of em) and re-create the worst fight scene ever! And keep this ship minus having everything be white! Its too bright on a big tv
The old Enterprise was overdue an upgrade and when it was refit at the start of the first movie it created a satisfying continuous timeline going back to the first star trek episodes! a lot of time had passed between the movie era and the old series and the constitution class was getting old! the new ship takes design cues from all over the place and even taking into account future tech its hard to stomach
ta mas vrga la rukita, jajajaja para esos años, esa tecnologia barata de animacion frame por frame a escala de algo :p era la mamada. y muy expensive :D
i find the new ships design is so different that you would be very hard pressed to refit this ship into the motion picture ship. Which it should do. I care about the enterprises design because unlike most scifi shows this ship is actually a character in its own right. I will never forgive abrams ruining the star trek franchise with this screwed up mess.
i hated the new 1 when i first clocked eyes on it but in part it has grown on me, still dont like the oversized neacells and the fact the struts for them are bent, as for the film, it was rubish with all that stupid lence flire and shakey cam crap.. plus the new chekov was so anoing and needed to die
When the head modeler brought in a finished model of the original Enterprise, Gene Roddenberry held it in his hands and said, "Now that's one beautiful ship". But he was holding it upside down! I relate it to a later quote. Gene was getting complaints about the TNG Enterprise. At a convention he said,"It's not about what the vessel looks like. It's about the people and their stories". Only rabbid fans care about what the ship looks like. If it has 3 cylinders and a dish that's all that matters
you cant really compare these two enterprises...because (if im not mistaken) by the time TMP came out..the original Enterprise had been refitted (hence the more boxy nacelles). Since ST: 11 is a prequel to TOS, you can only compare TOS Enterprise to 11 Enterprise, and when you do, one notices that they look rather similar (albeit the 11 Enterprise could have been WAY better and more loyal to TOS Ent...)
@cdname47 It was. The deflector was on top, the nacelle on bottom. The saucer was in the middle, same angle as on any other ship. Bisected, it's perfectly symmetrical. Look closer mah friend.... Jellyfish was bad though.
Of all the Trek shps, I never took to the original TOS Enterprise.
I mainly hated the way she was filmed in the 60s, that weird "saucer down, nacelles up" list that she seemed to fly with (though I'm sure that's more to do with the primitive 60s filming techniques more than anything. Though I was dissapointed to see it recreated for the otherwise excellent remastering!)
The new Ent is pretty cool...can't wait to see more of it!
I've said it and I'll still say it. The new Enterprise is just as beautiful.
But it's a 'newer' Beauty. Sleek lines, smooth surfaces, graceful curves.
That said, I also love the TMP Enterprise, very much. It's a more 'classic' beauty. Like a 40 year old car, or a Tall Ship. She's all beautiful Angles that just guide the eye where it needs to go.
Their BOTH beautiful, and I for one, have room in my heart for both of these lovely ladies. And damn it, so should the rest of you. :P
From the first time I saw her I fell in love with the refit Enterprise. She was beautiful, elegant and so powerful. And those nacelles... Like Roddenberry wrote in his poem, "My love has wings/ Slender, tapered things..." He could have been writing about the 1701 refit. The 2009 version ain't the prettiest thing I ever saw. BUT she's got the saucer and three cylinders and she's approved by Paramount. AND she's got the right name. She'll get you home everytime.
How in the name of Mustafar do they expect a ship that frickin' big to get off the ground?!? I mean, LOOK AT HER! She's HUGE! She could easily outweigh a Galaxy-class!
I think the nacelles on the new Enterprise are the 'ugly' bits. The rest is a mix of the old and refit constitution designs. Still prefer the refit/Enterprise-A design the best - sleek and beautiful.
Do you know what's wrong with the new Enterprise? I'll tell you.
When they redesigned her for "The Motion Picture" she was like a beautiful woman in a slender black dinner dress. Very sexy, elegant, great lines & just perfect.
This ship is like looking at one of those overly ripped weight lifting chicks. Sure she might be a woman on the inside but you say to yourself, "man, that could be a guy" or "That's a little too much steroid usage."
The original series and 1979 movie refit hands down...they were designed...thought about. The 2009 botch-up was just vomited out of concept art...much like the movie.
Lets see, 2009 Out of Scale, Glossy high interior, steroid bloated Nacelle, Undermanned, over stylized piece of #D Grbage that if my Grandmother had wheels she'd be a wagon, or the 1979 Refit Constitution Class?
Mind you I'm biased so I'm not answering, but I will say this. In 30 years, no one had the common decency to get some accurate dimensions, and how much windex they have to use on the Glass on the Bridge?
For the new Enterprise, I can't even say 'forgive and forget', only forget. For the great lady, I will paraphrase McCoy from Wrath of Khan: "She is really not dead. As long as we remember her."
BTW do you know when in 1979 TMP Kirk asks McCoy how he likes the new sickbay and instruments here. He responds "They do not. It's like working in a damn computer centre." I remembered that just the moment when I had seen the bridge on both Kelvin and 2009 Enterprise.
A thing there is been that I will never know is like them, building the ship of JJ in the in the soil instead of in the space, they threw to the skies something that is not aerodynamic! Leaning that is cheaper....
In the right they made the same process with the orbital station that we see in the film.
Hate those nacelles, those pregnant, fishbowl-fat aquarium nacelles. The rest of the ship is fine, the stark white crystal bridge even I can tolerate. Of course Im curious why the Enterprise has giant water pipes and a huge boiler room that looks like its under a high school, I mean come on. I dont see ever looking at Abrams enterprise and not thinking "thats not the big E"
I don't even mind the fishbowl nacelles. (Tho I'd like to know why they didn't use the style you saw on the other vessels. Those looked functional.) My main problem is how far back those things are placed. With that tapered engineering hull, where the @#$% is engineering now? In the middle of the shuttle bay?! And you expect me to believe you can fit that Battlestar Galactica sized hanger bay in that economy sized trunk? It just doesn't work!
@DireLeon2010 HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! God, these comments are more fun than the video. ROFLMAO!!! "Battlestar Galactica" =win. I totally agree with you. How is it that the bridge can be so frappin' high tech, yet the engineering room looks like crap? And the idea of those nacelles hanging over the hangar bay (which looks bigger than the engineering room to boot); it doesn't work. They should be right over engineering to route stuff up to the nacelles, not through an empty hangar bay. Hurrr.
@krashly71 That's because they ran out of money before they could build an actual boiler room. Most likely in the next one they'll have an actual engine room.
@krashly71 They should have made them look more like the Constitution refit's nacelles, IMO. I've seen an awesome mockup of a "TMP Refit" of the 2009 Enterprise over at a Star Trek: Bridge Commander modding site that killed a lot of the bloated feeling the new ship has.
@krashly71 I have to agree! Someone on another video stated that the JJ-prise looked like a Constitution Class starship on steroids. I had to counter that it looked more like estrogen because of the "big boob like nacelles".
Jeez, I hated the ridiculous JJ Abrams' movie! I can't think of anything redeeming or good about it!
@krashly71 Water is 2 parts Hydrogen and one part Oxygen and Hydrogen might be a cheaper source of matter for the matter/anti-matter reactors... Just a thought...
It's like compairing apples to oranges. Like compariing pre-Crisis DC to post-Crisis DC. They are two seperate but similar universes though parted will never be apart. I like both. I heard the same comments about the Galaxy Class back in the day. Give it time and it will also grow on you too or not. It is up to you. Young minds, new ideas. Be talerent.
She had a mor theatric intro in the first film. You could tell then that underneath the then new look that she was still the same overworked girl launched in 2245. Abrahms' Enterprise looked like a whole new entity. It didn't even feel like the Enterprise. And it also looked like it belonged to at least the 26th century, not the 23rd. The 1979 (2271) version belonged with the time and will always be a beautiful lady.
@MrThomasCWest and kirck does not be come caption of enterprise till till captin pike becomes handicap and not able to moveand spoke kirk werre always freinds and in star trek 2 kirk said he got comidated for origina thinking on the no win senerio simation
The difference between the 1979 and 2009 versions is.....
The 1979 version took everything the at was great about the original Enterprise and IMPROVED on it. It's sleek, it's powerful, and it looks like something that might be built if the tech actually existed.
The 2009 version looks like a 1959 Cadillac was pimped out by a blind ghetto rat. Shit stacked on top of shit.
1966 and 1979 (and yes, I do know there are differences between those two) Enterprise: Absolutely beautifull vessel(s), complete and perfect design.
2009 Enterprise: Awfully ugly, no other words can descripe it. I mean, look at those nacelles, looks way to big in comparison to the rest of the vessel, and the design of the neck and engineering-hull just looks plain wrong.
Of the 1966, 1979 and 2009 visions of the Enterprise, I liked the 1979 (yes, I know it was a "refit"). But there are other designs by fans that I liked more. Look up Gabriel Koerner Enterprise on YouTube.
@fmscribs the movie was never made to be canon. JJ abrams said he wanted to make it new and appeal to the star wars fans. (eg no more shields just explosions, and pulse cannons instead of phasers) just enjoy it for what it is not what it should be
And that my friend is why I didn't like this re-make. If I wanted to watch Star Wars I'll watch Star Wars. This is not the Trek I grew up with. All action with absolutely not substance. Sorry but I want my Trek to be the opposite of that. Substance with a little action tossed in. That method has worked for 40 + years so why try to reinvent the wheel ? This movie was made for the MTV generation drones out there that just love this sort of tripe.
In my opinion. The 1979 version of the Enterprise was so beautifully done { & my personal favorite of all the Enterprises'... original thru the E}. As for the 2009 version....I think it's not that practical or creative. They basically just gave her fat nacelles, curved the nacelle struts, & moved the support neck back. Not to mention how poorly the hanger deck area was designed. Cramming all those ships on the flight deck. WTF ? Who came up w / that?
To the complier of this video: Very nicely done! Very respectful for the "refit" Enterprise (Phase II's girl) and the Enterprise that has helped expand Star Trek's fan base beyond old farts like me! :0) Great job!
IMHO the refit of 1701 is the last one to LOOK like a battleship. Well other than maybe C and E. D was just too smooth. UNLESS and I say UNLESS you bring the refit of D for the final episode of TNG into the mix, that has the photon cannon, cloak, and 3'rd warp nacelle. Again this is all IMHO.
Many people seem to hate the new engine room. I like it very much. It's more real to me than strobe lights pulsing in plastic tubes and huge touch screens. It gave us a more "underneath the hood" look at the heart of the ship. Scotty James Doohan would be in his glory. Even my fellow motorheads agree with me.
I disagree. It looks way more like a oil refinery or sewage treatment center. A starship isn't infinitely big. Therefore the massive scale of the engine room made it not believeable.
@DaftStrings It should be important to note, apearently they ran out of money for production (most likely when they gave us TWO shiny new bridges) and had to ask Budwieser if they could use one of their brewries for the engineering. Budwieser agreed in return for a bit of product placement.
That said, I have a great explanation for the engineering section. IT WAN'T DONE YET. The partitions and walls hadn't been put in, so the 'guts' were showing, so to speak.
@DaftStrings I learned it from a friend. I'm pretty sure he had the disks. In any case, I checked it on Memory Alpha, and they confirm it. It makes alot of sense once you realize it though, don't it.
I don't buy that excuse for the walls not being built, down in Engineering, on the Enterprise. The design department {JJ and Comp.} were looking for that kind of "look". The Kelvin had it in her lower decks and so did the Enterprise's lower decks & shuttle bay. It's just another sympathetic excuse for poorly designed sets in a poorly done movie.
I was embarrassed when I saw those sets. They looked like the Titanic's engine room or a Bud factory, like you said. Either way, it sucked.
The concept art shows something much cleaner. And of course the Kelvins sets looked similar. Do you think that they did all of the sets in perfect chronilogical order. They did them in order of importance of apearence. They just ran out of money damn it. Did you not see the Bridge, BOTH of them. The Soverign Bridge was cheaper than the KELVIN'S, let's not even MENTION the Enterprise itself.
And I feel like that's somewhat forgivable, compared to, say The Golden Bubblewrap Klingon Belt.
If that's what on the DVD cometary I don't believe it. I believe that people hated so much that that was the excuse they used to cover up there huge mistake. If you look at TOS and what they did on a limited budget there's just no excuse for it. Especially in a multi million dollar movie.
And comparing an entire set to a Klingon bubble wrap belt it absurd.
Everything from TNG to Nemesis cut corners where they felt that they could, and don't deny it. The reason there were never any pockets, for instance, was that it was just too expensive. Could they have found a better location, quite possibly, but it would likely have cost them more money, and that would either mean less money on what WAS good looking, or them even more over budget than they already were (and they were).
The next movie will have a more complete engine room, trust me.
"The next movie will have a more complete engine room, trust me."
Like you have some inside scoop on what the new sets are going to look like.....yeah right. Face it...the design department blew it with the design of the lower decks of this ship & the Kelvin. For goodness sake look how good the 1960's engineering room looked compared to this. Hell, even the eng room on Enterprise looked better than this "Titanic" piece of crap.
"the engines look like......pregnant worms." well, if a guy drives a car with a big engine, it`s said that he needs it for "some compensation". The person wich is responsible for that warp engines needs obviously a lot compensation. ;-)
YTWeitgucker 4 days ago
God Star Trek : The Motion Picture sucks balls sooo hard..almost felt asleep in front of it (on tv). This lame, cheesy crap hasn't much to do with the wittyness, rythm, and intelligent coherence of Picard's show or even Abrams'version (which is truely a good revival). Essentially, anything Star Trekish is better in every aspect than all those movies with Kirk and cie ( ok, Unknown Land something was allright).
youteubee69 1 week ago
I'm a TNG fan, but the thing I loved about the Original cast movies is how they made the Enterprise one of the characters -- you had the sense that she was being pushed to her limits and, at times, was only being held together by the ingenuity of Scotty.
martinthomas1980 1 week ago
terrible music
badgerboyUK 1 week ago
For FUCK SAKE!! QUIT COMPLAINING SAYING "In the Reboot the ships too big!!" and? Who cares. "The reboot is shit" Why are you watching this then?! "The time lines all wrong!!" Pay attention to when this is set. "J.J is crap" The one thing I can agree on.
LukeTheDuke1100 1 month ago
Music is completely off
GladiusPrimus 1 month ago
The 2009 Enterprise looks like a pelican. I hate the design they came up with. They could even agree as to how big it was. That shows piss poor planning. It barely retained the original shape in the secondary hull and the engines look like......pregnant worms. The Enterprise refit in 1,2 & 3 was the best design for the ship.
TheReturningShadow 1 month ago 5
@TheReturningShadow So what ud rather the original or refit? It would be laughable to see a modern film presenting the future with blocky computers and CRT displays. The refit and A were not too bad but the interior of the original was like a plastic shed. Say what u want about remake exterior but they nailed the modern day futuristic concept interior beautifully.
akouzov 3 weeks ago
@akouzov The computer displays and such were just fine in terms of technology, however it was a little over the top as to the amount crammed into the the bridge. And also the main screen was NEVER a front window on ANY Enterprise until this movie and the bridge NEVER exited to hallway. It's ALWAYS an elevator. There are just too many inconsistencies with this Enterprise. To me everything about it just looks bad due to bad planning.
TheReturningShadow 3 weeks ago
@TheReturningShadow Shat I'm about to comment about what you wrote is not an endorsement of the new REnterprise. The Enterprise D had a door that emptied into a hallway, the ready room, the briefing room & lift. The original Enterprise had a door that exited to a hall way as well as the turbo lift. The refit had 2 turbo lifts and a door that exit to a hallway. This is from the official blue prints.
Trekfreek 5 days ago
@Trekfreek I understand your thoughts on the Enterprise-D bridge. However the exterior followed that blueprint. I also have seen blueprints of the original and refit and I never saw a door opening to a hallway, only turbolifts and turbolifts that also open to the rear airlock, but the exterior visuals always matched what the shown on the interiors. This movie doesn't. The ext. is like the refit dish but the interior shows hallways off to the side of the bridge. Continuity Errors.
TheReturningShadow 5 days ago
@TheReturningShadow I'm not arguing the problems with the new movie. I HATE the new movie. I'm only pointing out that your comment about the bridge is wrong. You must have seen the wrong blue prints. I have the original official Blue prints of both the Enterprise in TOS and TMP. What I told you is 100% right. On NCC 1701 there is a never seen cramped corridor on the side of the bridge that leads to a repair panel behind all of the bridges computers & view screen.
Trekfreek 5 days ago
In 1979 the Refit design was years ahead of its time, they did something right, they created a legend.................. No comment on the new "E", I just don't get it, I tried to! You can't replace the original, the classic, why would you even try...................
subron6er 1 month ago 3
@subron6er refit/A was better than TOS hands down. Just not sure that FLAT nacelles were that good really. My favourite enterprise nacelles are hands down ENTERPRISE E. Beautiful. Futuristic. Detailed and Threatening.
akouzov 3 weeks ago
My #1 problem with the new one is it effectively kills the Star Trek genre dead in it's tracks. If TNG demonstrated anything it's that The Great Bird's vision had to continue forward. Going backwards in Enterprise - as well done a show as it was -, was a major mistake IMO. Are there no new minds who can come up with NEW characters? They had to steal the old characters and ideas? Star Trek is dead in space right now. I want it back - in a time period AFTER Voyager's return to the Alpha Quadrant.
1964nickel 2 months ago
@1964nickel But it does creat an alternate time line. That is fresh and new,
VONNAIR 1 month ago
@VONNAIR I'm not real fond of the proliferaition of time travel in ST. It's overused in my opinion and isn't what Roddenberry envisioned as a future anyway. To me Star Trek was always about a CONTINUING future, an unknown future where we all worked together to learn, to explore new things. IMO a new timeline just puts different clothing on old ideas. The genre is stagnant because it's frozen after the Dominion War and no one is smart or brave enough to figure out a way to move it forward.
1964nickel 1 month ago 2
i agree with everyone...jj abrahms enterprise left a lot to be desired...but to quote capt. kirk.."young minds , fresh ideas , be tolerant!" that was from ST3
TheHyperdrive99 2 months ago
@TheHyperdrive99 True but at least the Excelsior looked better than this pelican.
TheReturningShadow 5 days ago
The 1979 model is the best looking ship in all of Star Trek.
IDF1987 2 months ago
Sorry but the new JJ product is an ungainly, blobby, melty and disproportionate pig of a starship design. It's absolutely awful, much like his film just has no good content, action or true star trek feeling.
New isn't always better, sometimes new is just new.
Foxx1981 2 months ago
@Foxx1981 I strongly suspect that if the Abrams design had been the one used from the very beginning of Star Trek, nobody would have a problem with it. They'd think it was sleek, they'd think it was cool, and would wax nostalgia over it. And if they tried to introduce, say, the design used for the Enterprise-A, it would be called "too blocky" and "unaerodynamic".
Basically what I'm trying to say is you seem to be taking out your hatred of the reboot in general on this ship.
TheZacula 2 months ago
Considering much of the new design is based on the refit, I think they did ok. Nacelles were a little big but whatever.
redwa11er 2 months ago
eh, the reboot could've been worse. Lucas could've written and directed it.
Keihryon 3 months ago
2009 Enterprise is nothing but a slap in the face to Matt Jeffries who originally designed the ship. I have completely ignored this farcical film.
It's not even part of continuity as far as I'm concerned.
Actionguy1 3 months ago 3
@Actionguy1 sad little trekker
monkeyhanger83 3 months ago
@monkeyhanger83 Never sad. Pissed off and extremely disappointed that Paramount would allow the franchise to go in this direction is more like it. Face it boy, everything about this movie was nothing but a juvenile shitfest!
Star Trek: 1966-2009.
R.I.P.
Actionguy1 3 months ago 2
@Actionguy1 I genuinely don't get why so many trekkers out there HATE the film??
Trek was dying long before 2009, mainly bcos enterprise failed due again trekkers who wouldn't accept it as it a prequel that simply tried to address the MANY continuity errors in trek cannon, i.e the klingon foreheads!
Paramount and abrams gave trek a new lease of life by taking it in a new direction.
Kirk and TOS was always THE most popular of the trek franchises but we couldn't have the original 6movies re-done
monkeyhanger83 3 months ago
@Actionguy1 Here, Here!!! JJ fucked up.
bryanttillman 2 months ago
the nacelles are all wrong on the new one but other than that it's awesome
godzillaisnuclea123 3 months ago
@godzillaisnuclea123 i agree but i see why they went down that way in designing it for the film.
monkeyhanger83 3 months ago
..i dont like the new design one bit...
why couldn´t they do something with the Enterprise B??there was plenty of gap to fill between Kirk and Picard..and there would be no historic design conflicts.. o.O
why rewrite StarTrek history in such stupid way..? the bridge of the Enterprise looks far more modern than the Enterprise-E´s..all shiny and with crystal clear displays..it is at least supposed to be dark and computed somwhere between Enterprise NX and Enterprise from the first movie..
Spionsilver 3 months ago 2
@Spionsilver Remember Capt. Herrimann and Enterprise-B? He had a full bridge crew all nice and ready to take over....better HIM than that three season farce w/ Bakula. And THIS shit, JJ's fistfuck, was the deathknell of our dream.
bryanttillman 2 months ago
The old one is beautiful.
spangelosf43 3 months ago 2
I will always like the first Movie Enterprise! She is a Timeless beauty!
The JJ one is a Desing Mistake for me!
Lee78072 4 months ago 9
@Lee78072 I'm sorry, but I must disagree.
First of all, desing is not a word. I recognize you may have been VERY impassioned when writing it, but... yeah. In any case, I thought that it was very DIFFERENT. Not necessarily better, but simply trying to separate itself from the original. Which is actually a good idea for any reboot.
The original was good, but I like the reboot as well. And I'm quite excited for the sequel.
TheZacula 2 months ago
@TheZacula I think you right!
But i grew up with the Original Movie Enterprise!
For me, she is a timeless Beauty!
....when i saw ST TMP for the first time..when i saw the Enterprise
in Drydock...i was crying! Believe it or not!
Well i was a Child at that time, but i am a Fan of the Refit Constitution!
Lee78072 2 months ago
the old ship style is better, but the special effects are better then the old
Kernphysiker 5 months ago
I think the biggest disappointment of the '09 movie was the departure from the original series. A movie like Abram's was talked about for decades, so I think many were expecting to see all of the original series' concepts maintained, but were not. The departures are too much for me. The new ship is ugly. And the characters, not the actors mind you, but the characters are all wrong. Indeed, it is an alternate universe Trek.
TrekToons 5 months ago
old is best.... and always will be
fairhillnorrie 5 months ago
we wont hate the new one if jj abrams didnt ruin the concept, its not about the changes, its about the concept of star trek. they can make a better movie with better effects but stay with the concept! ex: a ship registry never started with 0. warp necelle is not a jet intake! it ruins everything! why jj made another movie about kirk again? there's another enterprise, enterprise-b? or C? that havent been told yet.
RianputraF 5 months ago
@RianputraF erm...didn't Enterprise C get destoyed by the Romulans while she attempted to defend a Klingon out post against a sudden Romulan attack? (Yesterday's Enterprise, TNG.) And wasn't the B the Enterprise being launched at the beginning of Generations? Oops, sorry, never feed a Trekkie past midnight. : D
LoriCiani 5 months ago
the new one is way better...that old one was made back then....if they had the tech of what we have today back then, the enterprise would look like todays. ppl need to stop living in the past look towards the future. everything changes!
FUCKxTHExREST 5 months ago
@FUCKxTHExREST I disagree. Change happens, but change isn't always good.
TrekToons 5 months ago
The 09 movie fucked up 45 years of history. They couldent even get vulcan right for Christ sake. That new ship is a polished turd. Matt Jeffries would be spinning in his grave if he saw what they called the Enterprise in 2009.
cadddy1871 5 months ago
A lot of people hate the new ST movie because they cant stand change.. they cant stand the thought of it.
as kirk stated in ST6, "people can be very frightened of change"
irontusk341 5 months ago
@irontusk341 That depends on the change. For example, we've had "change" for over two years now, and it ain't working. Why change something that works? Why didn't Abrams come up with his own story concept of a large spaceship traveling around the galaxy seeking out new life instead of 're-imagining' Star Trek? Answer 1: Him and the other young upstarts in Hollywood lack the imagination to create new, fresh ideas. 2: It guaranteed him a big paycheck.
TrekToons 5 months ago
@irontusk341 That depends on the change. For example, we've had "change" for over two years now, and it ain't working. Why change something that works? Why didn't Abrams come up with his own story concept of a large spaceship traveling around the galaxy seeking out new life instead of 're-imagining' Star Trek? Answer 1: Him and the other young upstarts in Hollywood lack the imagination to create new, fresh ideas. 2: It guaranteed him a big paycheck.
TrekToons 5 months ago
made secondary hull look too small almost like it was just an after thought. nacelle struts should not be curving like they are here remember engineering crew needs easy access ot nacelles.bridge suppose it's own deck, nacelles are too long, they trail off way too far to the back. shuttle bay should not be cluttered as is depicted in movie, bad enough having to land in clear confine space real headache having to manuver shuttle around all piping and structural fittings
SpockBorg5 6 months ago
Weirdest. Music. Choice. EVER!
SpyengoEen 6 months ago
BOTH sequences are great
vidwatcher31951 6 months ago
Abramsprise stinks. I despise everything about that aborted mongoloid fetus of a ship.
rhyanwood1 6 months ago
The old enterprise is really superb and touching. The new opening is just a popcorn scene.
I just don't like the warp effect of the old enterprise, may be it is better to replace it with the ones in 2001 space odyssey.
maskscraper 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
☻/
/▌
/ \
This is Bob. Soon bob will take over youtube! spread this to 50 videos. It will soon be on the news. then you will know you helped spread Bob
MrZ359 7 months ago
"LOVELY!"
MrWINNSLAW 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The new Enterprise is sexy! I may be one of the few Trek fans who love it, but I'm proud of it! Hopefully though the sequel will restore some of the intelligence. JJ's Star Trek was fun, but it could've been better.
louielouie11224 7 months ago
the only way the new ship looks good is if you completely ignore classic star trek ship design everything from 1701-1701-E even then its still garbage
armymatt83 7 months ago
BUt building the 2009 Enterprise on Earth's surface... idiotic!
sadailinikada86 7 months ago
jj abrams has his head up his ass. Fugly fugly ship.
asuch874 7 months ago
Oh and Motion picture was the worst star trek movie ever.
CodeD223 7 months ago
You hardcore Trekkies go suck Shatners dick. So fucking picky. New enterprise is way cooler looking then the original. TMP enterprise looked exactly like the 170-A minus the a. But they're all cool in their own way. What if gene rodenberry had made the refit of the TOS one look like that? You'd think it was the shit cuz he made it. Well he's dead. JJ is tryin to bring Trek back in a new direction. You don't like it don't watch. Go play with you trek dolls on your basement
CodeD223 7 months ago
Love the video. The first half made me cringe and the second half gave me goosebumps
silvereagle2061 8 months ago
Great video but the music just doesnt work.
cchris000043 8 months ago
Once, when I was really sick, I had to shit into a bucket because I couldn't reach the toilet in time. First, there was these three long logs that plopped into the bucket. Then, when the hard stuff had cleared out, I started to shit out this mushy, muddy stuff, which pooled up at the end of the three logs and made a big circle. My pile of shit was a better looking Enterprise than the JJ Abrams one. Fuck you, JJ.
Zebonka 8 months ago
@Zebonka Thank you Zebonka!
Actionguy1 8 months ago
The JJ enterprise bridge is brought to you by Apple Inc.
DrZoid99 9 months ago
JJ enterprise is TURD
SuperJadziaDax 9 months ago
TMP would win even though it had refit problems, JJ enterprise wouldn't stand a chance though becauuse it was from the past.
confusioncaption 10 months ago 9
BIH J.J. Abrahms
TomatoeAssassin 10 months ago
I liked the refit version of the Enterprise better. I loved the "beauty shots". Gorgeous. This new version is okay, but just okay. The nacelles look really stupid, and I hate the tapered end of the ship. Makes it look like Starfleet ran out of money to build the ship and had to improvise, lol.
mindyschocolate 11 months ago
Old IS gold. But new is inspiring. You cant not help to love the old Enterprise, Shes got all the nostalgy and history of star trek with in her. But the new one is also very very cool in its own remade way, I like it, I think its a huge hit. Even the good old Captain Kirk Aka William S. Liked it.. It has the form, the details look better in some ways, in other ways not. I cant wait to see a refit version of it. In this video its compared to the Refitted Enterprise. Not the Orginal one.:)
Alorrana 1 year ago
@Alorrana Yeah you're right, I agree with you, I like the new one too. But this is only a comparison between the motion pictures, 1979 to 2009. Maybe I will make another one with the USS Enterprise of 1966, The Original-Original :)
LeVonMcLane 1 year ago 3
@Alorrana you really think shatner is going to tell people what a load of crap the new design. it's typical hollywood etiquette to bs about somthing that stinks
SpockBorg5 6 months ago
@SpockBorg5 Ofc not, :) What im saying is that to our time, its good, and the old gal for her time, she was perfect. :)
Cheers mate
Alorrana 6 months ago
@Alorrana True! I prever the first Movie Enterprise! A Timeless Desin! Good Actors! A Fantastic Story!
I really dont like the JJ Enterprise!
A big Design Mistake for me!
Lee78072 2 months ago
I would just like to say the new Trek was the highest grossing of all of the movies... I hardly think that this ship has destroyed the franchise... in fact I think it is saving it. Yes, I may not be the biggest fan of the new design, but whatever... If you don't like it, just destroy your copy of the movie... Don't watch the next one... If I don't like a movie I don't buy it, but something tells me all of you people who say you hate it have a copy... probably on BR. I for one can't wait for XII
jtucker81 1 year ago
Enterprise was built in a spacedock, not in a corn field in Iowa. Abrams really dropped the ball on this one. Now, we have to wait another 10 years before we a reboot. Thanks JJ, you freakin' douche bag!
CherryONeil 1 year ago
The new Alternate time line Universe Big - E? It looks like an over sized Toilet to match its cast, and Vulcan destroyed?, gimme a break, where was Kirkd best friend Gary Mitchell?
please FLUSH new ship and move, horrible comparisons!, I would still take The Wrath of Khan any day over any of the other movies but love First Contact too!, oh yeah and The Undiscovered Country and Nemesis!! damn now they have ruined Trek AGAIN!!!
Utubetrekk 1 year ago
@Utubetrekk you think Undiscovered country ruined trek, what about 5 I can't even watch it. Nemesis was pretty poo apart from the Reman Scimitar was lush :)
Zorolord 1 year ago
@Zorolord no i meant I LOVED TUC !!!.TOTAL GREAT , NEXT TO WOK, of original cast movies i think.
Utubetrekk 1 year ago
@Utubetrekk sorry I didn't read your orginal post correctly :( Yeh TUC is great :)
Zorolord 11 months ago
@Zorolord ST6 had so many wonderfully complex layers involving story, politics, characters and social commentary that I get something different from it every time I watch it.
ST5 was rubbish, I agree - even Roddenberry himself rejected it.
Nemesis wasn't bad, but you could tell it was written by a fanboy and not someone who was trying to tell a real story. Plus, the writer failed his fanboy card by making Picard bald in the Academy - in "Tapestry" he clearly had a mop of brown hair...
Dargonhuman 11 months ago
The new Enterprise reminded me of a stunted bodybuilder with arms like Popeye.
Buuuuuutch 1 year ago 2
Well, I like both versions. THe original because, well duh it's the first to boldy go (pardon the pun) while the new version has some pretty interesting prospects. As for why this looks this or that, remember, alternate timeline. one of the reasons why things are the way they are is perhaps what the kelvin survivors brought back with them helped to shape starship designs and defenses. It's a cop out, yeah, but it's all relative and I love it all.
thelionwaits 1 year ago
Um....wtf with the music?
lonstar70 1 year ago
@lonstar70 agree. i just can't get the great 'feeling' when i saw the fly by of the old enterprise in the old movie.
shgyn 1 year ago
I prefer the 2009 Enterprise. Especially the interior - the old sets don't look futuristic anymore. The new ship just looks like it belongs to the future.
jimbopumbapigsticks 1 year ago 3
I say they should make a new series with the whole "Your timeline is now screwed up!" thing using the actors from the new movie (well some of em) and re-create the worst fight scene ever! And keep this ship minus having everything be white! Its too bright on a big tv
greegry 1 year ago
i hate spot lights
eurandi 1 year ago
No, no...Cannot enjoy, the new ship sucks!
Humbertusmarius 1 year ago 2
Both ships are great so everybody shut up and enjoy the film !
sledback1 1 year ago
The old Enterprise was overdue an upgrade and when it was refit at the start of the first movie it created a satisfying continuous timeline going back to the first star trek episodes! a lot of time had passed between the movie era and the old series and the constitution class was getting old! the new ship takes design cues from all over the place and even taking into account future tech its hard to stomach
katakisLives 1 year ago
The rounded corridors are rather like those in the NX class Enterprise of Jonathan Archer
katakisLives 1 year ago
ta mas vrga la rukita, jajajaja para esos años, esa tecnologia barata de animacion frame por frame a escala de algo :p era la mamada. y muy expensive :D
HiramVazquezStudio 1 year ago
The USS Enterprise is hot shit in all its forms, well maybe not 1701-E.
DOHC2L 1 year ago
Somehow I like the "isolineiar" warp nacelles better.
Ashenion22 1 year ago
i find the new ships design is so different that you would be very hard pressed to refit this ship into the motion picture ship. Which it should do. I care about the enterprises design because unlike most scifi shows this ship is actually a character in its own right. I will never forgive abrams ruining the star trek franchise with this screwed up mess.
woofdogmeow 1 year ago 2
i hated the new 1 when i first clocked eyes on it but in part it has grown on me, still dont like the oversized neacells and the fact the struts for them are bent, as for the film, it was rubish with all that stupid lence flire and shakey cam crap.. plus the new chekov was so anoing and needed to die
zebadee277 1 year ago
When the head modeler brought in a finished model of the original Enterprise, Gene Roddenberry held it in his hands and said, "Now that's one beautiful ship". But he was holding it upside down! I relate it to a later quote. Gene was getting complaints about the TNG Enterprise. At a convention he said,"It's not about what the vessel looks like. It's about the people and their stories". Only rabbid fans care about what the ship looks like. If it has 3 cylinders and a dish that's all that matters
spacecowboy5000 1 year ago 3
you cant really compare these two enterprises...because (if im not mistaken) by the time TMP came out..the original Enterprise had been refitted (hence the more boxy nacelles). Since ST: 11 is a prequel to TOS, you can only compare TOS Enterprise to 11 Enterprise, and when you do, one notices that they look rather similar (albeit the 11 Enterprise could have been WAY better and more loyal to TOS Ent...)
Trekfan1001 1 year ago
The Enterprise is and always be the most beautiful ship ever...no other is better!
sergiogottsfritz 1 year ago
BUT...that Kelvin was horrible as hell...
Trek ships should be symmetrical dammit!
cdname47 1 year ago
@cdname47 It was. The deflector was on top, the nacelle on bottom. The saucer was in the middle, same angle as on any other ship. Bisected, it's perfectly symmetrical. Look closer mah friend.... Jellyfish was bad though.
TheZacula 1 year ago
Of all the Trek shps, I never took to the original TOS Enterprise.
I mainly hated the way she was filmed in the 60s, that weird "saucer down, nacelles up" list that she seemed to fly with (though I'm sure that's more to do with the primitive 60s filming techniques more than anything. Though I was dissapointed to see it recreated for the otherwise excellent remastering!)
The new Ent is pretty cool...can't wait to see more of it!
cdname47 1 year ago
Put a huge neon blinking Budwiser sign on the secondary hull of the JJ Abrams Enterprise
SolarisBreeze57 1 year ago
I've said it and I'll still say it. The new Enterprise is just as beautiful.
But it's a 'newer' Beauty. Sleek lines, smooth surfaces, graceful curves.
That said, I also love the TMP Enterprise, very much. It's a more 'classic' beauty. Like a 40 year old car, or a Tall Ship. She's all beautiful Angles that just guide the eye where it needs to go.
Their BOTH beautiful, and I for one, have room in my heart for both of these lovely ladies. And damn it, so should the rest of you. :P
vp21ct 1 year ago 10
i hate the 2009 enterprise because it looks bad to me n the bridgr is too fuck brite
FahttGdome2 1 year ago
@FahttGdome2 agreed they should of make it like the orginal series thy did bridge repeat on tng episode relic
ironwolf9999 1 year ago
From the first time I saw her I fell in love with the refit Enterprise. She was beautiful, elegant and so powerful. And those nacelles... Like Roddenberry wrote in his poem, "My love has wings/ Slender, tapered things..." He could have been writing about the 1701 refit. The 2009 version ain't the prettiest thing I ever saw. BUT she's got the saucer and three cylinders and she's approved by Paramount. AND she's got the right name. She'll get you home everytime.
spacecowboy5000 1 year ago
How in the name of Mustafar do they expect a ship that frickin' big to get off the ground?!? I mean, LOOK AT HER! She's HUGE! She could easily outweigh a Galaxy-class!
droidekabakugan1986 1 year ago
I think the nacelles on the new Enterprise are the 'ugly' bits. The rest is a mix of the old and refit constitution designs. Still prefer the refit/Enterprise-A design the best - sleek and beautiful.
TRUMPER007 1 year ago 3
Do you know what's wrong with the new Enterprise? I'll tell you.
When they redesigned her for "The Motion Picture" she was like a beautiful woman in a slender black dinner dress. Very sexy, elegant, great lines & just perfect.
This ship is like looking at one of those overly ripped weight lifting chicks. Sure she might be a woman on the inside but you say to yourself, "man, that could be a guy" or "That's a little too much steroid usage."
Either way....she ain't beautiful anymore. RIP
fmscribs 1 year ago 3
and the old is ONLY gold....what a beautiful ship.
BMan100 1 year ago
that was good I love Star Trek all the way
Donshea24 1 year ago
The original series and 1979 movie refit hands down...they were designed...thought about. The 2009 botch-up was just vomited out of concept art...much like the movie.
celticarchie 1 year ago
Lets see, 2009 Out of Scale, Glossy high interior, steroid bloated Nacelle, Undermanned, over stylized piece of #D Grbage that if my Grandmother had wheels she'd be a wagon, or the 1979 Refit Constitution Class?
Mind you I'm biased so I'm not answering, but I will say this. In 30 years, no one had the common decency to get some accurate dimensions, and how much windex they have to use on the Glass on the Bridge?
TrekkieGal69 1 year ago
oh, and i like the seal version of these songs....nice.
roydu100 1 year ago
nice vid...very well done. thanks for doing this and congratulations. It's cool.
roydu100 1 year ago
Got to be the 1979 Enterprise for me
thegreenmanofnorwich 1 year ago 2
yeah :) this is what I call a debate :)
LeVonMcLane 1 year ago
Fugly somewhat, Star trek ends here
Cumulonimbus82 1 year ago
For the new Enterprise, I can't even say 'forgive and forget', only forget. For the great lady, I will paraphrase McCoy from Wrath of Khan: "She is really not dead. As long as we remember her."
BTW do you know when in 1979 TMP Kirk asks McCoy how he likes the new sickbay and instruments here. He responds "They do not. It's like working in a damn computer centre." I remembered that just the moment when I had seen the bridge on both Kelvin and 2009 Enterprise.
FildasKirk 1 year ago 3
A thing there is been that I will never know is like them, building the ship of JJ in the in the soil instead of in the space, they threw to the skies something that is not aerodynamic! Leaning that is cheaper....
In the right they made the same process with the orbital station that we see in the film.
Grayphus 1 year ago
Hate those nacelles, those pregnant, fishbowl-fat aquarium nacelles. The rest of the ship is fine, the stark white crystal bridge even I can tolerate. Of course Im curious why the Enterprise has giant water pipes and a huge boiler room that looks like its under a high school, I mean come on. I dont see ever looking at Abrams enterprise and not thinking "thats not the big E"
krashly71 1 year ago 17
@krashly71
I don't even mind the fishbowl nacelles. (Tho I'd like to know why they didn't use the style you saw on the other vessels. Those looked functional.) My main problem is how far back those things are placed. With that tapered engineering hull, where the @#$% is engineering now? In the middle of the shuttle bay?! And you expect me to believe you can fit that Battlestar Galactica sized hanger bay in that economy sized trunk? It just doesn't work!
DireLeon2010 1 year ago
@DireLeon2010 HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! God, these comments are more fun than the video. ROFLMAO!!! "Battlestar Galactica" =win. I totally agree with you. How is it that the bridge can be so frappin' high tech, yet the engineering room looks like crap? And the idea of those nacelles hanging over the hangar bay (which looks bigger than the engineering room to boot); it doesn't work. They should be right over engineering to route stuff up to the nacelles, not through an empty hangar bay. Hurrr.
mindyschocolate 11 months ago
@mindyschocolate co-galactica fan...
if you'd ask me?
i only liked the engines sounds thats it...
zip.
nakazatoGTR 11 months ago
@krashly71 That's because they ran out of money before they could build an actual boiler room. Most likely in the next one they'll have an actual engine room.
gregstitzproductions 1 year ago
@krashly71 agreed, I hate the narcelles to for the 2009 version, guess i will always like the Original Enterprise refit.
grosskopf2 11 months ago
@krashly71 They should have made them look more like the Constitution refit's nacelles, IMO. I've seen an awesome mockup of a "TMP Refit" of the 2009 Enterprise over at a Star Trek: Bridge Commander modding site that killed a lot of the bloated feeling the new ship has.
WWIIOLgeorgh 10 months ago
@krashly71 I have to agree! Someone on another video stated that the JJ-prise looked like a Constitution Class starship on steroids. I had to counter that it looked more like estrogen because of the "big boob like nacelles".
Jeez, I hated the ridiculous JJ Abrams' movie! I can't think of anything redeeming or good about it!
Actionguy1 8 months ago
@krashly71 Water is 2 parts Hydrogen and one part Oxygen and Hydrogen might be a cheaper source of matter for the matter/anti-matter reactors... Just a thought...
Darkeklaw 6 months ago
Thank you
usshilary 1 year ago
It's like compairing apples to oranges. Like compariing pre-Crisis DC to post-Crisis DC. They are two seperate but similar universes though parted will never be apart. I like both. I heard the same comments about the Galaxy Class back in the day. Give it time and it will also grow on you too or not. It is up to you. Young minds, new ideas. Be talerent.
BADBOYCH 1 year ago
She had a mor theatric intro in the first film. You could tell then that underneath the then new look that she was still the same overworked girl launched in 2245. Abrahms' Enterprise looked like a whole new entity. It didn't even feel like the Enterprise. And it also looked like it belonged to at least the 26th century, not the 23rd. The 1979 (2271) version belonged with the time and will always be a beautiful lady.
MrThomasCWest 1 year ago 10
@MrThomasCWest and kirck does not be come caption of enterprise till till captin pike becomes handicap and not able to moveand spoke kirk werre always freinds and in star trek 2 kirk said he got comidated for origina thinking on the no win senerio simation
ironwolf9999 1 year ago
The difference between the 1979 and 2009 versions is.....
The 1979 version took everything the at was great about the original Enterprise and IMPROVED on it. It's sleek, it's powerful, and it looks like something that might be built if the tech actually existed.
The 2009 version looks like a 1959 Cadillac was pimped out by a blind ghetto rat. Shit stacked on top of shit.
arachknight1979 1 year ago
1966 and 1979 (and yes, I do know there are differences between those two) Enterprise: Absolutely beautifull vessel(s), complete and perfect design.
2009 Enterprise: Awfully ugly, no other words can descripe it. I mean, look at those nacelles, looks way to big in comparison to the rest of the vessel, and the design of the neck and engineering-hull just looks plain wrong.
ulca01 1 year ago
This "new" Enterprise truly is A GARBAGE SCOW! And should be hauled away AS GARBAGE!
ZZAAN84 1 year ago
@ZZAAN84 lol at the Trouble with Tribbles paraphrasing. Win.
GIRlovesWaffles 1 year ago
tos was the best!
Curas1 1 year ago
Of the 1966, 1979 and 2009 visions of the Enterprise, I liked the 1979 (yes, I know it was a "refit"). But there are other designs by fans that I liked more. Look up Gabriel Koerner Enterprise on YouTube.
TS7019 2 years ago
Continues,
What dumb-ass thought to build the 2009 Enterprise on Earth?
1} she's not designed for atmospheric flight.
2} she would collapse on herself because of her shear weight.
3} What kind of power would it take to lift such a ship? More than I can think of.
4} I guess no one read the old books that said she was built in orbit NOT on the ground.
fmscribs 2 years ago
@fmscribs the movie was never made to be canon. JJ abrams said he wanted to make it new and appeal to the star wars fans. (eg no more shields just explosions, and pulse cannons instead of phasers) just enjoy it for what it is not what it should be
WillsReviews 2 years ago
WillsReviews,
And that my friend is why I didn't like this re-make. If I wanted to watch Star Wars I'll watch Star Wars. This is not the Trek I grew up with. All action with absolutely not substance. Sorry but I want my Trek to be the opposite of that. Substance with a little action tossed in. That method has worked for 40 + years so why try to reinvent the wheel ? This movie was made for the MTV generation drones out there that just love this sort of tripe.
mfscribs 2 years ago
1) She did ok in the TOS episode where she was thrown back in time and ended up where? Hmm... Oh yeah! IN EARTHS ATMOSPHERE.
2) Didn't collapse then, and I'm sure antigrav units and SIF fields would help
3) Probably no more power then needed to send her flying through space at super-luminal speeds.
4) It was one of those old books that suggested she (or atleast the saucer part) could land long before TNG was even thought of.
Kaziarl 2 years ago
Oh, and she was built at San Fransico Shipyards. Where as the D was built at Utopia Planitia ORBITAL Shipyards. Notice the key difference there?
Kaziarl 2 years ago
In my opinion. The 1979 version of the Enterprise was so beautifully done { & my personal favorite of all the Enterprises'... original thru the E}. As for the 2009 version....I think it's not that practical or creative. They basically just gave her fat nacelles, curved the nacelle struts, & moved the support neck back. Not to mention how poorly the hanger deck area was designed. Cramming all those ships on the flight deck. WTF ? Who came up w / that?
Note: Poor choice of music for this.
fmscribs 2 years ago
This is alarmingly sexy.
Vernaculardotca 2 years ago
To the complier of this video: Very nicely done! Very respectful for the "refit" Enterprise (Phase II's girl) and the Enterprise that has helped expand Star Trek's fan base beyond old farts like me! :0) Great job!
BOLDLYGO2007 2 years ago
I love the New Enterprise it's look awesome. love the video job well done
Lush246 2 years ago
IMHO the refit of 1701 is the last one to LOOK like a battleship. Well other than maybe C and E. D was just too smooth. UNLESS and I say UNLESS you bring the refit of D for the final episode of TNG into the mix, that has the photon cannon, cloak, and 3'rd warp nacelle. Again this is all IMHO.
Data1701E 2 years ago
They're not supposed to be battleships though, Starfleet is a peaceful entity.
CynicalVision 2 years ago
not really if they start crap StarFleet will fight until it won.
Lush246 2 years ago
Many people seem to hate the new engine room. I like it very much. It's more real to me than strobe lights pulsing in plastic tubes and huge touch screens. It gave us a more "underneath the hood" look at the heart of the ship. Scotty James Doohan would be in his glory. Even my fellow motorheads agree with me.
charger19691 2 years ago
I disagree. It looks way more like a oil refinery or sewage treatment center. A starship isn't infinitely big. Therefore the massive scale of the engine room made it not believeable.
DaftStrings 2 years ago
@DaftStrings It should be important to note, apearently they ran out of money for production (most likely when they gave us TWO shiny new bridges) and had to ask Budwieser if they could use one of their brewries for the engineering. Budwieser agreed in return for a bit of product placement.
That said, I have a great explanation for the engineering section. IT WAN'T DONE YET. The partitions and walls hadn't been put in, so the 'guts' were showing, so to speak.
vp21ct 2 years ago
Really? That also explains the product placement. Where did you learn this? The bonus features on the two-disc version?
DaftStrings 2 years ago
@DaftStrings I learned it from a friend. I'm pretty sure he had the disks. In any case, I checked it on Memory Alpha, and they confirm it. It makes alot of sense once you realize it though, don't it.
vp21ct 2 years ago
Yeah. Though normally a film in production would shoot those sequences later or something. maybe I'll rent the bonus disc.
DaftStrings 2 years ago
vp...,
I don't buy that excuse for the walls not being built, down in Engineering, on the Enterprise. The design department {JJ and Comp.} were looking for that kind of "look". The Kelvin had it in her lower decks and so did the Enterprise's lower decks & shuttle bay. It's just another sympathetic excuse for poorly designed sets in a poorly done movie.
I was embarrassed when I saw those sets. They looked like the Titanic's engine room or a Bud factory, like you said. Either way, it sucked.
fmscribs 2 years ago
The concept art shows something much cleaner. And of course the Kelvins sets looked similar. Do you think that they did all of the sets in perfect chronilogical order. They did them in order of importance of apearence. They just ran out of money damn it. Did you not see the Bridge, BOTH of them. The Soverign Bridge was cheaper than the KELVIN'S, let's not even MENTION the Enterprise itself.
And I feel like that's somewhat forgivable, compared to, say The Golden Bubblewrap Klingon Belt.
vp21ct 2 years ago
If that's what on the DVD cometary I don't believe it. I believe that people hated so much that that was the excuse they used to cover up there huge mistake. If you look at TOS and what they did on a limited budget there's just no excuse for it. Especially in a multi million dollar movie.
And comparing an entire set to a Klingon bubble wrap belt it absurd.
mfscribs 2 years ago
Everything from TNG to Nemesis cut corners where they felt that they could, and don't deny it. The reason there were never any pockets, for instance, was that it was just too expensive. Could they have found a better location, quite possibly, but it would likely have cost them more money, and that would either mean less money on what WAS good looking, or them even more over budget than they already were (and they were).
The next movie will have a more complete engine room, trust me.
vp21ct 2 years ago
If for no other reason than to silence people like you from bitching.
vp21ct 2 years ago
vp,
"The next movie will have a more complete engine room, trust me."
Like you have some inside scoop on what the new sets are going to look like.....yeah right. Face it...the design department blew it with the design of the lower decks of this ship & the Kelvin. For goodness sake look how good the 1960's engineering room looked compared to this. Hell, even the eng room on Enterprise looked better than this "Titanic" piece of crap.
mfscribs 1 year ago