# Will the Star Trek USS Enterprise from the New Film make it to kit form?



## Guy Schlicter (May 3, 2004)

Hi,Now that is just about a week away from the grand premiere.Doyou think someone is preparing a model kit of the New USS Enterprise?I believe it will be made as a plastic model kit.What would be really cool is that Round 2 has kept a model kit of it quiet to surprise people though very unlikely.Nice thought though.I believe with the publicity this film has had a kit will likely happen.Too bad it won't be released while the film is in the theater though,Guy Schlicter.


----------



## Roguepink (Sep 18, 2003)

Sadly, developing model kits is no longer quite as appealing as it was 20 years ago. Consumer habits, market trends, and manufacturing costs have all changed in unfavorable ways. Now the hobby kit companies need to wait and see if the movie does well enough to, in their eyes, generate enough potential sales to justify the cost of design and production.

For the great success of the new Battlestar Galactica, you would think the super cool ships in that show would have made it into the hobby stores.

I'm not saying yes or no here, just pointing out that there are forces working against these things.


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

If the marketing juggernaut hasn't produced it yet, don't count on it. It could still show up further down the line, sadly highly unlikely.


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

Who's information did you get this from.


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

As of todays date: Paramount licensing has issued no permission to any model kit company to produce said kit. Check Viacom's license list posted on several toy distributer's sites.


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

I was simply refering to "Officially Licensed" mercandise. A garage kit is anyones game, and a target for Viacom's lawyers.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

In other words, sorry about the false alarm, no officially licensed kit is planned at this time.


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

I think the general audience here, and the person who asked the original question are thinking of a mass produced commercial kit "Licensed" and manufactured by Round 2 the current company who holds the license to Trek model kits. As stated before, as of todays date there is 'NOT' a kit of the Star Trek XI Enterprise in the works, or planned. The future is still a question fans want answered, sadly the answer right now is still a very firm NO.


----------



## Roguepink (Sep 18, 2003)

And all that noise put aside, what WERE those things in Thomas's hand?


----------



## Guy Schlicter (May 3, 2004)

could someone post a link to Thomas pictures of this model please.Thanks.


----------



## Epsilon (Apr 3, 2004)

Check the thread here:

http://www.starshipmodeler.net/talk/viewtopic.php?t=72205

On the first page, Thomas peeks a decal kit, and page three, he hyperlinks "a fistfull of nacelles".

Just because it ain't official, doesn't mean that it isn't in the works! Earlier this year Diamond Select showed prototypes of an Excelsior and a 1701-B, but didn't have "official" approval from the PTB...


----------



## miraclefan (Apr 11, 2009)

If the movie does well then yes, but not till ether the middle of 2010 or just out time for the sequal.


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

FSM-1 said:


> I didn't note that presumption in the original question, suffice to say that there is a kit on the way. If you are prejudiced against GK's that's OK. Currently there may be no "Licensed" kits, but I'm sure there will be.


Yes, there's a kit on the way. Pictures of some of its parts have already been posted on the interwebs.


----------



## Jodet (May 25, 2008)

Ductapeforever said:


> I think the general audience here, and the person who asked the original question are thinking of a mass produced commercial kit "Licensed" and manufactured by Round 2 the current company who holds the license to Trek model kits. As stated before, as of todays date there is 'NOT' a kit of the Star Trek XI Enterprise in the works, or planned. The future is still a question fans want answered, sadly the answer right now is still a very firm NO.


You can only say that no kit has been announced. 

You cannot say that no kit is in the works or planned.


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

I clearly stated as of yesterday's date. The future is anyone's guess. This all hangs in the balance that this new movie does well at the box office. That means this film 'MUST' make back the over $150 million that it cost to make this film in its first weekend. Paramount is holding it's breath, and has fingers crossed. If you want a model kit, more toys, and perhaps a sequel...get as many family, friends, and aquaintences to go see this movie on opening weekend. Not once, not twice, but three times or more. Remember this is still a business decision. They won't make more movies, toys, models etc. just because a few die hard fans want it. This is a hard sell and must absolutely score big. Don't get me wrong guys, I'm an old Trekie! Believe me, I don't want to see this franchise die either. Wishing Trek well !


----------



## Jodet (May 25, 2008)

Ductapeforever said:


> I clearly stated as of yesterday's date. The future is anyone's guess. This all hangs in the balance that this new movie does well at the box office. That means this film 'MUST' make back the over $150 million that it cost to make this film in its first weekend. Paramount is holding it's breath, and has fingers crossed. If you want a model kit, more toys, and perhaps a sequel...get as many family, friends, and aquaintences to go see this movie on opening weekend. Not once, not twice, but three times or more. Remember this is still a business decision. They won't make more movies, toys, models etc. just because a few die hard fans want it. This is a hard sell and must absolutely score big. Don't get me wrong guys, I'm an old Trekie! Believe me, I don't want to see this franchise die either. Wishing Trek well !


We know it will open big, but the second weekend is critical. Remember how 'Watchmen' had a huge opening weekend, then fell off dramatically? I'm planning on going to see it opening weekend AND the next weekend...


----------



## SamwiseVT (Apr 30, 2009)

The modeler magic website has a page talking about a new Enterprise model. I will post the link once I get 2 posts.


----------



## SamwiseVT (Apr 30, 2009)

Ok, lets try now:
http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=9455


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

*Not so fast...*

here's what the QMX site has to say about their build..

This replica was created specifically and exclusively for Bad Robot Productions and Paramount Pictures to support the global Star Trek launch event. We currently have no announcements on availability of a retail version. However, we'd like to suggest those interested in the Enterprise project sign up for our newsletter at http://insider.qmxonline.com.

don't count your nacelles before they're built


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

Hollywood Insider's have stated Star Trek has to make at least $300 Million in it's first two weeks or the franchise is in severe danger of dying on the vine. $600 Million, to guarantee a bonafied success and continuation of a series of movies.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Ductapeforever said:


> That means this film 'MUST' make back the over $150 million that it cost to make this film in its first weekend.


Uh, no. Anything over $60 million for the opening weekend is respectable.



Ductapeforever said:


> Hollywood Insider's have stated Star Trek has to make at least $300 Million in it's first two weeks


"$300 million in its first two weeks?"



I'm not sure which "insiders" you're referring to, but you've either misquoted them, or they have no idea what they're talking about.


----------



## drmcoy (Nov 18, 2004)

Well, if they offer an official kit, I sure hope they offer it in some size OTHER than 1/350....or at least in addition to the 1/350. Geeze Louise -- how's about one that's about 10 to 15 inches long? 

I already have the honking large MR TOS Enterprise, and I don't know about yoose guys, but I don't have room to keep displaying such huge models.


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Carson Dyle said:


> Uh, no. Anything over $60 million for the opening weekend is respectable.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I agree, those numbers are ridiculous.


----------



## Jodet (May 25, 2008)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> here's what the QMX site has to say about their build..
> 
> This replica was created specifically and exclusively for Bad Robot Productions and Paramount Pictures to support the global Star Trek launch event. We currently have no announcements on availability of a retail version. However, we'd like to suggest those interested in the Enterprise project sign up for our newsletter at http://insider.qmxonline.com.
> 
> don't count your nacelles before they're built


This is a replica, not a model. Limited edition, probably VERY pricey. And nothing I'd have any interest in.


----------



## miraclefan (Apr 11, 2009)

Carson Dyle said:


> Uh, no. Anything over $60 million for the opening weekend is respectable.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


WOW! did Phantom menace even make THAT much in two weeks? I think THE DARK KNIGHT made that much, but for paramount to be expecting those types of numbers is insane!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

miraclefan said:


> WOW! did Phantom menace even make THAT much in two weeks? I think THE DARK KNIGHT made that much, but for paramount to be expecting those types of numbers is insane!


Guys, no movie has EVER made $300 million in its first two weeks. 

Dark Knight scored the biggest opening weekend ever for a motion-picture with a gross of $158,411,483. Total lifetime gross is $1,001,921,825.

Star Trek's numbers will be nowhere near that impressive, although Paramount is expecting a pretty big weekend. As I said earlier, anything over $60 million is acceptable.

Remember, Dark Knight was a _sequel_ to a moderately successful reboot. If Star Trek XI does well, one would expect Star Trek XII to do_ very _well.

For a breakdown of the World Wide box office champs go here: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/

For the domestic numbers go here: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic.htm

Sorry to have hijacked the thread, but let's keep a little perspective.


----------



## falcondesigns (Oct 30, 2002)

Thanks Rob,everybody here is an expert and nobody knows anything!Thanks for setting us stright.alex


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

If you are going to keep perspective, then at the same site check the grosses adjusted for inflation - there's the real info - I don't know why people make a big deal about $ numbers for theatrical releases when really the point is to say "lots of people went to see this movie" (an indication of quality - or at least attractiveness) as opposed to "a few people took out loans to go see this movie"


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Gunstar1 said:


> If you are going to keep perspective, then at the same site check the grosses adjusted for inflation


In terms of assessing a film's overall, long-range _popularity_ (as opposed to profitability), I agree. 

Then again, if you want to assess the current marketplace viability for, say, a spaceship model, a film's opening grosses can be a reasonably valid telltale. 

I think it's safe to say an injection-molded version of the Trek XI E will eventually make the scene...


----------



## PixelMagic (Aug 25, 2004)

You know, I HATED the New E when we got the first picture of her. But that picture was horrible.

Now having seen it from most all angles, I went from hating it to finding it "acceptable"

The refit is still the most beautiful Enterprise though. They should have gone with something more along the lines of Gabe Koerner's Enterprise for XI though.

Still, I'd love to have an injection model of the new E.


----------



## JeffG (May 10, 2004)

I'd really like to have a model of the new Enterprise in 350th. To me, it looks no better or worse than any of Treks other ships-just different. Another variation on a theme. Actually from certain angles, like all ships, it looks pretty sweet. Even the D eventually grew on me, though it's probably my least favorite.


----------



## LGFugate (Sep 11, 2000)

I like being a member of HobbyTalk, so I'm staying out of this one...



Larry


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Okay guys, everybody take a deep breath and repeat after me: "It's only a spaceship model" (well, not yet it's not, but with any luck it eventually will be). 

I have no problem allowing this discussion to continue as long as it remains civil. To that end, kindly refrain from trolling or making comments of a personal nature.


----------



## lunadude (Oct 21, 2006)

...back to the topic.

I'm pretty sure somebody will produce a kit. It might even be fully licensed.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

With regard to the pics from Thomas Sasser, keep in mind that they don't just hand out licenses in good faith. You have to prove that you can deliver the goods. So, it's quite possible, if not damn likely, that what Thomas is showing off is work done on spec, to show that his side (which presumably includes Round 2, given past history, but logically, it could be any model company) can produce a model kit that folks will want to buy. Which means producing an example or two. Doesn't mean anything has been approved or licensed, just preparations for when they finally do approve the thing.

Puts a little perspective on his "Oh, if only..." comment, doesn't it?


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

Didn't Thomas put out a GK version of the NX-01 before anyone else did too?


----------



## jsnmech18 (Sep 26, 2006)

...a GK kit, a main stream plastic kit, either way, I'd love a copy or two of this new Enterprise.


----------



## Guy Schlicter (May 3, 2004)

Hi Folks,Now that Star Trek is out and doing well at the box office I'd say a model company like Round 2 will take a chance of doing a model kit of the Enterprise and believe it will sell and who knows maybe a U.S.S. Kelvin too????.I'd say its almost certain now,Guy Schlicter


----------



## Epsilon (Apr 3, 2004)

You know what? Now that I've actually seen the new movie (twice... once with the GF, and today I took her kids)...

Like it or not, that new ship IS the Enterprise. And it really looks fantastic on the screen.

I was with the rest of you (mostly) when I saw the initial pics and I just kinda tilted my head like a dog hearing a whistle that nobody else can hear, wondering "what were they thinking?"

But now... 

Go see it. When that ship sails away at the end of this movie (with a nice voiceover, BTW) then - *wham*- jumps into warp... Friggin priceless!

Let's just say that I feel like we got a repreve, and we'll still have NEW Star Trek in our future, which I thought was pretty much over after Enterprise was cancelled.

And anybody who's seen it can attest that not just the Kelvin and the Enterpise that are options for new kits... there are several other ship classes shown, abiet briefly, for us to want to get!


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Still fugly.


----------



## mikephys (Mar 16, 2005)

Once I saw it in action, I liked it a lot more!


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

It's beautiful.

Anyone who watches her rise out of the mist of Titan and not feel their pulse quicken a bit, should check their geek badge at the door...


----------



## jsnmech18 (Sep 26, 2006)

Krako said:


> It's beautiful.
> 
> Anyone who watches her rise out of the mist of Titan and not feel their pulse quicken a bit, should check their geek badge at the door...




Dude, how bout it? I almost pee'd a bit when I saw that. 
Wonderful piece of film there!

Warping in to intercept the jelly...weapons firing...yikes that was great!


----------



## Prowler901 (Jun 27, 2005)

jsnmech18 said:


> Dude, how bout it? I almost pee'd a bit when I saw that.
> Wonderful piece of film there!
> 
> Warping in to intercept the jelly...weapons firing...yikes that was great!


Holy Crap! Wasn't that just the coolest thing?!! Reminded me of when the old girl came up behind Khan and blasted him :thumbsup: :woohoo:


----------



## Steve Mavronis (Oct 14, 2001)

Did anyone notice the bridge is lower below the dome than in previous versions Of the Enterprise? There is a shot in the new movie panning out from the viewscreen to the outside and it's now located in the front slot usually associated with the saucer lighting with the old TMP version bridge! If so this ship might be larger in scale. This threw me watching the movie because the outer bridge structures have similar overall shapes. I doctored up the teaser trailer "under construction" shot showing where I think I saw it located in the new movie. I inserted a screen capture of the bridge back wall into the slot opening. It's either there or right above the lighting slot opening. I'm going to have to see it again to catch another look:


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

I don't suppose anyone pointed out to TIIC that Titan isn't a gas giant, therefore there are no "mists" for the ship to either hide in or rise from...


----------



## Steve Mavronis (Oct 14, 2001)

Captain April said:


> I don't suppose anyone pointed out to TIIC that Titan isn't a gas giant, therefore there are no "mists" for the ship to either hide in or rise from...


Titan's upper atmosphere is a layer of thick haze that we can't see through to the surface below:

http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/saturn/moons/titan_atmosphere_overview.html


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

How far down in the atmosphere would they have to go to pull that stunt?

And what the hell happened to sensor capabilities in the reboot? Seems like the tech on both sides sucks compared to TOS.


----------



## jsnmech18 (Sep 26, 2006)

Steve Mavronis said:


> Did anyone notice the bridge is lower below the dome than in previous versions Of the Enterprise? There is a shot in the new movie panning out from the viewscreen to the outside and it's now located in the front slot usually associated with the saucer lighting with the old TMP version bridge! If so this ship might be larger in scale. This threw me watching the movie because the outer bridge structures have similar overall shapes. I doctored up the teaser trailer "under construction" shot showing where I think I saw it located in the new movie. I inserted a screen capture of the bridge back wall into the slot opening. It's either there or right above the lighting slot opening. I'm going to have to see it again to catch another look:



experience-the-enterprise.com has this Enterprise listed at 2500 feet or 762 meters long.

From what I saw on screen, she may be bigger, but not that much bigger.
Some official info would be welcome for sure. Also, startrekmovie.com has the Enterprise listed as a "Beta" platform, so who knows what they'll do for the next one.


----------



## omnimodel (Oct 9, 2004)

I don't care what the haters say... to quote Scotty:
"I'd like to get my hands on her AMPLE nacelles..."


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

Captain April said:


> I don't suppose anyone pointed out to TIIC that Titan isn't a gas giant, therefore there are no "mists" for the ship to either hide in or rise from...





Captain April said:


> How far down in the atmosphere would they have to go to pull that stunt?
> 
> And what the hell happened to sensor capabilities in the reboot? Seems like the tech on both sides sucks compared to TOS.


Oh for crying out LOUD!!

You have GOT to be kidding me!!


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

some folks are just desperate to find something to hate.

You know, I've seen it 4 times now and while there are aspects I don't care for (the brewery and the water pipes. I don't mind the industrial look per se, but I don't like the impression that engineering "deck" is that big without being chopped up into corridors and rooms)

If you really want to find a nit to pick, here's a freebie...

Why does the Captain of the Kelvin take the turbolift "down" to a deck when the shuttlebay is in the module that is "above" the saucer?

there, go nuts!


----------



## JeffG (May 10, 2004)

He made a quick stop at the restroom first! Seriously though, people who liked the film (myself included) can't change the minds of those who don't and I'm not gonna waste my time trying. But back to what this thread was all about in the first place; I'm almost certain we'll be seeing an injection molded kit of this Enterprise from a major company. Why wouldn't we? The film is wildly successful and has appealed to a wider audience already than any other Trek film so far-with maybe the exception of TWOK, but it's still early. And for cryin out loud, if they made a kit of the Scorpion...c'mon. How can they NOT do the new ship. My only question is if the ship is indeed a tad bigger than say, the refit. To me, it certainly seems like it though I've seen no official statement so far on size. If so, too big for a 1/350th kit?


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Jeff,
I agree with everything you said, but I think you may find that TWOK was not the most popular to the wideset audience.

The voyage home and first contact both made more money than TWOK

TWOK did reinvent the series and is a fan favorite, but not the most financially successful


----------



## JeffG (May 10, 2004)

I stand corrected. I guess what I meant was most of my friends, including the ones with only a passing interest in Trek, seem to remember TWOK more than any other Trek film and was even mentioned prominently in a Seinfeld episode. Personally, The Voyage Home was infinitely more forgettable than The Wrath Of Khan, but thanks for correcting me.


----------



## Jodet (May 25, 2008)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> Jeff,
> I agree with everything you said, but I think you may find that TWOK was not the most popular to the wideset audience.
> 
> The voyage home and first contact both made more money than TWOK
> ...


TWOK also set the mindset at Paramount - 'come up with a script, spend as little as possible and try to squeeze a little more money out of the fans'. 

It took J.J. to persuade Paramount to spend BIG ($150 million) and try to reinvent the franchise. At which he has wildly succeeded.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

on the plus side, the next movie will almost have to be cheaper to make because all the startup costs of building the sets and costumes etc..won't have to be put into it.

pay for new guest stars, additional sets and off you go!


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

And if they keep this writing team, it'll be just as braindead as this one.

As for whether or not we'll see a model, I think a 1/1000 is pretty likely (assuming a ship slightly larger than the original ship; the dweebs on that website are on crack if they seriously think that ship is 2500' long!), but if this thing starts dropping like a rock in the next few weeks, which is still very possible, don't expect much else.


----------



## Captain America (Sep 9, 2002)

Captain April said:


> And if they keep this writing team, it'll be just as braindead as this one.
> 
> As for whether or not we'll see a model, I think a 1/1000 is pretty likely (assuming a ship slightly larger than the original ship; the dweebs on that website are on crack if they seriously think that ship is 2500' long!), but if this thing starts dropping like a rock in the next few weeks, which is still very possible, don't expect much else.


I don't KNOW, Captain April...It MIGHT well be much bigger than our favorite ol' Gray Dame...Pike indicates in the movie that the older Kelvin had at LEAST 800 people on board...I wonder whether the 'Abrams' had the same amount (It's basically an upside down Kelvin with 2 engines...Had saucer, dorsal, secondary hull...) of crew or more...It HAS to be physically bigger I think, as they shot Kirk in the pod out of the airlock in the dorsal. One would assume that machinery had to be there to allow that...

(Then AGAIN, you have to allow all the space in the secondary hull for Mr. Scott's giant Brewery...:freak::drunk: "Romulan Ale...FEH! It's like water...'Tis Nothin' again' our Federation Firewater!!!" :tongue::tongue: )

Wouldn't it be a kick in the yabos if she carried a crew compliment of 1,016?
Heh. By the time we get to the D, HER crew compliment will be about 10,000...


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

I'm posting this in the interests of maintaining the peace.

When it comes to Trek XI (not to mention just about everything else) I find it helpful not to worry too much about what other people think. Worrying about what other people think is vastly overrated IMO. 

So Joe Blow liked/ didn't like Trek XI. You can either take his opinion as a personal sleight, or you can take a deep breath and ask yourself why you should care in the first place.

Seriously, WHAT. DO. YOU. CARE?

Your opinion is your opinion. Own it. Being threatened by the contrary opinions of others says more about your own insecurities than it does about their taste in movies (or whatever).

TOLERANCE people, TOLERANCE.

Okay, end of rant.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> on the plus side, the next movie will almost have to be cheaper


It would be great if it worked that way, but this is Hollywood.

Having scored what appears to be a seriously spectacular franchise-reviving hit, Paramount will spare no expense on the sequel.

Suffice it to say throwing money at a film is not always a good thing, but given Abrams' actor-friendly predilection for dialogue and character development I don't see Trek XII getting lost in spectacle. One of the primary reasons both fans and general audiences are responding to Trek XI is its characters, and that's not something Abrams is likely to overlook next time out.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Rob,
you're right of course. We all know that TOS still hasn't turned a profit after 40+years:freak:

what I was referring to was the preproduction time and money (unless they plan on redesigning anything) the hand props are set, the uniforms are set the sets are..set. the cgi models have been ironed out

you know, in all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth about the Enterprise, I have yet to hear a comment or see a still frame of the "new" D-7 from the Kobiyashi Maru test


----------



## sbaxter (Jan 8, 2002)

Carson Dyle said:


> One of the primary reasons both fans and general audiences are responding to Trek XI is its characters, and that's not something Abrams is likely to overlook next time out.


That's one of the main reasons I was looking forward to his take on things. That, and his willingness to do things to make the audience really believe in the stakes. I doubt many members of the audience (especially the die-hard fans that went in unspoiled) would have seriously expected him to destroy Vulcan and for it to still be dust when the credits rolled, especially in a story involving time travel. I wonder how many people might have thought a reset button for Vulcan was coming before the movie ended.

Rob, I recall a while back that, having seen an advance cut of the movie, you expected the people who thought it was going to be great to find it "only" very good, while those who expected it to be an abomination would come away thinking it wasn't as bad as they feared. While some have done just that, naturally, are you surprised at all by the critical and popular reaction to the movie now that it is in wide release?

Qapla'

SSB


----------



## derric1968 (Jun 13, 2003)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> I have yet to hear a comment or see a still frame of the "new" D-7 from the Kobiyashi Maru test


I'm sure that when the movie is released on DVD, and we've had the opportunity to see some proper screen garbs, we'll all be analyzing the new D-7 to death. It's interesting that they were referred to as "Warbirds".

As it is, though, the D-7s were only on screen for such a brief time that it's hard for me to form an opinion. All I know is that I want to see more!!!

The same can be said for the other federation starships the warped to Vulcan with the Enterprise. I think there were some very interesting designs in there.

Anyway, the one thing I know for sure is that I really want a Kelvin model (in styrene), even more than the Enterprise!


By the way, has anybody heard anything in regards to an "Art of..." or "Making of..." book being done?


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

*ahem* Back to the topic on hand....

I'd like to see the ST:XI _Enterprise_ in model form as well. 1/1000 would be ideal; however, even 1/500 (to more or less match the Cutaway TOS E and/or the Movie Refit) would be a good size as well. 1/350? Personally, I'd say yeah, that too - but that would be a pretty major outlay of development time and $$$ from our presumed mainstream styrene kit manufacturer. As such I'd say that would be far less likely. A model in 1/1400 is almost certainly to be seen in resin from a GK'er.

In any case, proper attention to support will be necessary. I don't see a whole of support problems to the saucer/secondary hull section; however, the pylon join to the engines is really unbalanced for a model and would create a lot of stress on the engine structure, especially in larger scales.

There's someone or several someone's on the SSM board who are insisting that the new "E" is in the 2500 foot range..... apparently, logic and pronouncements to the contrary are irrelevant.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

sbaxter said:


> ...are you surprised at all by the critical and popular reaction to the movie now that it is in wide release?


The critics have been kinder to the film than I'd anticipated, often to a fault. On the other hand, I knew the film would play well with general audiences. Whatever else one can say about Trek XI it's a crowd-pleaser, and I could tell that from watching an incomplete, music-less, time-code & watermark festooned rough cut on my laptop.

From a marketing standpoint, the _real_ question has always been to what extent (if any) the studio could expand the series' fan base. Judging from this past weekend they appear to have expanded it considerably on the domestic front with women and younger viewers, and they've done so without significantly alienating the fan base. 

Next weekend will be telling; if attendance falls off by no more than 50% it's very likely Trek XI will go on the clear the all-important $200 million mark domestically, thus ensuring a sequel (despite reports to the contrary a sequel has not been given the greenlight).

Overseas B.O. paints a slightly less enthusiastic picture. Trek films have never played well in this market (relative to, say, James Bond movies or X-Men movies), and Trek XI's $35 million bow in 54 countries is far from spectacular. Still, here at home word of mouth is strong, and early indications are that the film will have "legs," i.e. it will hold its audience long enough to clear $200 million.

Here's hoping.



WarpCore Breach said:


> *ahem* Back to the topic on hand....


Here here!

If there's one thing I hate its off-topic posts!

:hat:


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

Carson Dyle said:


> Being threatened by the contrary opinions of others says more about your own insecurities than it does about their taste in movies (or whatever).


I felt compelled to respond to this. 

I in no way feel threatened by the opinion of another who may not have liked the film. And personally I do not care. What frustrates me is that no matter what you are talking about regarding the new film, a select bunch here find it necessary to always rain on the parade. And as far as I am concerned, it is nothing more than trolling. To incessantly make your negative opinion heard with out any constructive criticism IMHO is trolling. 

I would just like to view and participate in a thread where an adult conversation is being had regarding the flaws of the film and positive aspects of the film without constant specific folks infusing the debate with negative childish comments.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Raist3001 said:


> To incessantly make your negative opinion heard with out any constructive criticism IMHO is trolling.


Oh, I agree.

Look, trolling is trolling, irrespective of the subject.

I guess I should have differentiated between those who are motivated by nothing more than the desire to start a fight and those who have legitimate issues with the film and are able to discuss those issues in a mature and intelligent fashion. 

Suffice it to say my comments were not aimed at any one individual, and if I offended I apologize. As I said up top, I posted what I did in order to _maintain_ the peace, not (further) disrupt it. 

BTW, for what it's worth, the "IGNORE" feature can be a great alternative for those wishing to filter out incessantly negative chatter. 

That said, if a particular post strikes any of you as having crossed the line troll-wise you are urged to report it to the mods. I may be more lenient in this department than some of you are comfortable with, but if a poster can be demonstrated to have exhibited consistently troll-like tendencies I assure you he will be dealt with accordingly.


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

Carson Dyle said:


> > Suffice it to say my comments were not aimed at any one individual, and if I offended I apologize. Like I said, I posted what I did in order to _maintain_ the peace, not (further) disrupt it.
> 
> 
> My apologies as well Carson, I did not mean to imply that I took offense by your comment. I did not. I only wanted to voice my frustration regarding folks here whose only goal is to cause disruption rather than further a discussion.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

Raist3001 said:


> I felt compelled to respond to this.
> 
> I in no way feel threatened by the opinion of another who may not have liked the film. And personally I do not care. What frustrates me is that no matter what you are talking about regarding the new film, a select bunch here find it necessary to always rain on the parade. And as far as I am concerned, it is nothing more than trolling. To incessantly make your negative opinion heard with out any constructive criticism IMHO is trolling.
> 
> I would just like to view and participate in a thread where an adult conversation is being had regarding the flaws of the film and positive aspects of the film without constant specific folks infusing the debate with negative childish comments.


Thanks for saying that more eloquently than I could. I agree completely, and think it's the constant use by some of derogatory and condescending phrases (in multiple threads) like "the dweebs on that website are on crack if they seriously think that ship is 2500' long" that are fueling the fires, more than the fact some folks didn't like the movie.

If someone doesn't like the movie,fine. But to continually insist and /or imply that everyone who enjoyed the new film can't be a _real _Star Trek fan, or isn't intelligent enough, or well versed enough in the Star Fleet chain of command, to grasp what a lousy movie it really is, does seem to be a form of trolling.


----------



## Gemini1999 (Sep 25, 2008)

PhilipMarlowe said:


> Thanks for saying that more eloquently than I could. I agree completely, and think it's the constant use by some of derogatory and condescending phrases (in multiple threads) like "the dweebs on that website are on crack if they seriously think that ship is 2500' long" that are fueling the fires, more than the fact some folks didn't like the movie.
> 
> If someone doesn't like the movie,fine. But to continually insist and /or imply that everyone who enjoyed the new film isn't really a _real _Star Trek fan, or isn't intelligent enough or well versed in the Star Fleet chain of command to grasp what a lousy movie it really is, does seem to be a form of trolling.


PM -

I can agree with you there. That's why when I posted my somewhat less than glowing review of the film, I intentionally stayed away from making any comments that would be taken to be an indirect slam to those that enjoyed it. If someone likes the film, that's great - they don't need my approval as an endorsement. Conversely, if someone doesn't like the film, they should be free to say so, but should keep the commentary to the film, not those that watched it.

It does display a certain amount of insecurity when it comes to our individual opinions. If I sat here and thought "how can those people love that film when I really didn't like it" as some sort of a challenge, I'd really need to consider the need for some counseling. The same thing is true for those that loved the film - it's possible to like something, but we all know that there are going to be detractors out there. Just accept that fact (on either side) with a grain of salt and move along to the next topic if it really bugs you.

Bryan


----------



## JeffG (May 10, 2004)

Usually most positive posts are immediately followed by something or other 'sucks'. It often seems just to get in the last negative word.


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

Maybe the movie's $79.2 million opening weekend will persuade some model kit company to acquire the Trek XI license...


----------



## Jodet (May 25, 2008)

Krako said:


> Maybe the movie's $79.2 million opening weekend will persuade some model kit company to acquire the Trek XI license...


I hope so. After seeing the ship on the big screen I really want to build a model of one now. The new design didn't win me over at first, but I think it looked fabulous on screen. 

Definately a fan now. Want my model!!


----------



## ThisGuy (Apr 29, 2009)

derric1968 said:


> I'm sure that when the movie is released on DVD, and we've had the opportunity to see some proper screen garbs, we'll all be analyzing the new D-7 to death. It's interesting that they were referred to as "Warbirds".
> 
> As it is, though, the D-7s were only on screen for such a brief time that it's hard for me to form an opinion. All I know is that I want to see more!!!
> 
> ...


At this point, I'm surprised no one has posted a spoiler/nsfw cloaked "screengrab" of those other fed ships from the film so far anywhere. Not that I'd expect one here considering the methods needed, but one _elsewhere_. 



Carson Dyle said:


> Next weekend will be telling; if attendance falls off by no more than 50% it's very likely Trek XI will go on the clear the all-important $200 million mark domestically, thus ensuring a sequel (despite reports to the contrary a sequel has not been given the greenlight).
> 
> Overseas B.O. paints a slightly less enthusiastic picture. Trek films have never played well in this market (relative to, say, James Bond movies or X-Men movies), and Trek XI's $35 million bow in 54 countries is far from spectacular. Still, here at home word of mouth is strong, and early indications are that the film will have "legs," i.e. it will hold its audience long enough to clear $200 million.


The $18,000,000 take on Sunday looks worrying, but I have no idea how these things trend. If that signifies the max gross per day M-F, with a further trend down, what would the next weekend take likely be? Also, would they consider DVD sales when green-lighting a sequel?


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

I think the Sunday total was higher than that.


----------



## Steve Mavronis (Oct 14, 2001)

People out for Mother's Day probably lowered the Sunday attendance. I'm getting ready to see it a 2nd time taking my wife with me this time!


----------



## ThisGuy (Apr 29, 2009)

Krako said:


> I think the Sunday total was higher than that.


My apologies for taking it for grated, but I was quoting from this link posted in another thread here:

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/weekend-prediction-star-trek-65m/

If someone has a link to another confirmed total for Sunday, I'd like to see it. Perhaps it isn't as bad after all.


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

Looks like Sunday ended up around $21 million...

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=startrek11.htm


----------



## ThisGuy (Apr 29, 2009)

Still a drop, but much better. In general, how are week takes versus weekends?


----------



## GKvfx (May 30, 2008)

ThisGuy said:


> Still a drop, but much better. In general, how are week takes versus weekends?



Weekday takes are generally lower than weekend takes, even during the summer when the target audience is out of school.

Next weekend features the opening of "Angels & Demons". That will surely bite into the audience somewhat (but not considerably). My prediction for STXI - 28-32 million.

The weekend after that has the release of Terminator4 and Night at the Museum 2. Likely, those two will duke it out and those wanting to avoid the lines will go see STXI again. My prediction for STXI - 10-12 million.

Gene


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

FSM-1: With all due respect, your post does little more than fan the flames of a fire no one seems to want (yourself included, if I understand the point of your previous post).

For the last time: PLEASE REFRAIN FROM MAKING COMMENTS OF A PERSONAL NATURE. THAT GOES FOR EVERYBODY!


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

Ryan Church posted a nice piece of concept artwork for the new Enterprise on his site...

http://www.ryanchurch.com/


----------



## Steve Mavronis (Oct 14, 2001)

I think the viewscreen window to the bridge interior is smaller than depicted in my altered image below. At least it should be more narrow. The original under construction screenshot shows a notched in area inside the main slot. I saw the movie again last night. I hope the movie studio releases some more ship images now that it is at the theaters. I wonder if the new Enterprise comes out in kit form (in 1/350 scale) if they could include translucent decals for all 3 bridge deck window slots. I guess there are adjacent rooms for the side windows too. At least in the movie when Kirk runs through the door into the bridge, there is a circular hallway behind it so that would make sense to me.



Steve Mavronis said:


> Did anyone notice the bridge is lower below the dome than in previous versions Of the Enterprise? There is a shot in the new movie panning out from the viewscreen to the outside and it's now located in the front slot usually associated with the saucer lighting with the old TMP version bridge! If so this ship might be larger in scale. This threw me watching the movie because the outer bridge structures have similar overall shapes. I doctored up the teaser trailer "under construction" shot showing where I think I saw it located in the new movie. I inserted a screen capture of the bridge back wall into the slot opening. It's either there or right above the lighting slot opening. I'm going to have to see it again to catch another look:


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

Carson Dyle said:


> BTW, for what it's worth, the "IGNORE" feature can be a great alternative for those wishing to filter out incessantly negative chatter.


IGNORE works great until one poster quotes a poster in your ignore list


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

Krako said:


> Ryan Church posted a nice piece of concept artwork for the new Enterprise on his site...
> 
> http://www.ryanchurch.com/



Wow! That IS nice!!! Interesting to see that the overall shapes are virtually identical to the screen version.

Also interesting to see this ship in more TOS style colours, too. Especially the deflector and the bussard colours.

As a concept piece of art, I wonder what those "slashes" in the saucer edge might have been intended to be. They very much look like openings into the saucer!


----------



## Steve Mavronis (Oct 14, 2001)

^^^ I thought the "slashes" in the saucer edge were just part of a chrome reflective finish or something.


----------

