# Revell making Beyond Enterprise Refit?



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Basically wondering if the 2016 Beyond Refit Enterprise will be a plastic kit? Another possibility is Refit pylons and other details made in the garage kit community. I believe someone made a Refit Impulse vent after the last film.

http://i.imgur.com/NAVWplv.jpg


Please, only serious replies. 

A March 2016 thread asking about the Refit Enterprise kit being in production was treated with asinine comments about how no one would buy such a POS. The poster's question was never answered, but it was ridiculed. Shameful behavior. Especially for people here.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

I hadn't noticed they'd swept the nacelle pylons back for this new version. Was that in the STID version as well? I like that graphic. FWIW, I've never minded the idea that the JJ Universe (now officially "the Kelvin Timeline) Enterprise is much larger than its TOS counterpart.


----------



## Daniel Kaiser (Jan 22, 2015)

I would wait and see what they do with the E at the end of beyond. I have a sense that, that last shot in the trailer of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy that they are looking at a new refit.


----------



## sg-99 (Jan 11, 2009)

Right now the Beyond refit has the swept back nacelle struts and additional phaser banks.





http://i.imgur.com/kgrBhyX.png

http://i.imgur.com/Wjc2jmy.png


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

IIRC they also narrowed the width of the dorsal pylon to make it appear more vulnerable during the attack scenes. The warp engines are also a bit smaller.

I think whether they release a refit version depends on two things. Did the sales of the original NuE sell well enough or exceed expectations and will it appear in the fourth film as is or will they introduce an all new ship design instead. Return on investment is important and making a partial new tool for the ST-B refit needs to have either great sales or be something people are going to want for a while. It will be a business decision having nothing to do with the merits of the design- will it sell enough to make a profit?- if not then it will be up to the aftermarket people to supply the changed parts.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Richard Baker said:


> I think whether they release a refit version depends on two things. Did the sales of the original NuE sell well enough or exceed expectations and will it appear in the fourth film as is or will they introduce an all new ship design instead. Return on investment is important and making a partial new tool for the ST-B refit needs to have either great sales or be something people are going to want for a while.


More and more I think it really boils down to whether the licensee simply wants to do it. For some reason, Star Trek models are just sooooooooo hard to produce and such a gigantic, potentially company-destroying risk that companies can't possibly release new subjects unless a gun is to their heads. **cough-Round 2-cough** Yet, we somehow manage to get models from Interstellar, Fantastic Voyage and Space:1999. Was ROI factored into the decision to make the LIS Derelict? Or maybe CBS's license is simply ungodly expensive that companies make virtually nothing on Trek products. If that's the case, it falls on CBS and Paramount to loosen the spigot.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Richard Baker said:


> IIRC they also narrowed the width of the dorsal pylon to make it appear more vulnerable during the attack scenes. The warp engines are also a bit smaller.
> 
> I think whether they release a refit version depends on two things. Did the sales of the original NuE sell well enough or exceed expectations and will it appear in the fourth film as is or will they introduce an all new ship design instead. Return on investment is important and making a partial new tool for the ST-B refit needs to have either great sales or be something people are going to want for a while. It will be a business decision having nothing to do with the merits of the design- will it sell enough to make a profit?- if not then it will be up to the aftermarket people to supply the changed parts.



What Richard said, but I'll add:

First, this. I'm not a fan of the JJPrise. I'm not a fan of the movies at all, altho I actually like that cast and would like to see them in...well, enough. I respect those that do enjoy the movies and who enjoy this version of the Enterprise. So there's my bias up front.

I haven't really tracked the JJPrise kit. AFAIK it was not actually released by Revell USA but only existed as a 'graymarket' import from Germany, same as the two TOS kits. Yes? No? If yes, then importing likely made it an unreasonably expensive kit which of course is a barrier to mass acceptance. 

So, if that's correct, the key factor has to be how well do the new movies do in Europe? If they're doing boffo Box Office, Revell Germany will crank those things out. 

Was there a re-release, possibly a re-boxing, of the kit for the second movie? That would likely be a guide for what happens for this new movie. I think the fact that there seemingly hasn't been a word spoken about either a re-pop or a new kit reflecting any changes in the design (they do love to screw around with those movies, don't they?  Sorry, sorry..) does not speak to a positive outcome for those hoping for these things. 

I mean, there's been all the international hobby shows in Japan and Germany by now. If anything was going to happen it should have been announced. It's really crazy that a company with a license tie-in to a major Hollywood franchise would not announce product, right?


----------



## JeffBond (Dec 9, 2013)

My (not incredibly informed) impression is the original JJprise kit wasn't a tremendous seller. There was no repackaging for Into Darkness or for Beyond but the kit is being packaged together with Revell's TOS Enterprise as a 50th anniversary item. Movie-related kits are a huge gamble because the movie is usually out and gone; Interstellar happened because Moebius had a good relationship with Chris Nolan's production company due to their Batman kits--they wanted an Interstellar model out and made it easy for Moebius to do that. Batman is a continuing movie brand so Batman movie kits aren't such a gamble. It's more challenging dealing with Paramount/CBS. TV is potentially a better platform but even there it's rare to get a line of kits--look at Enterprise, where they did the huge NX-01 but basically no other subjects. On the other hand, if you have an older brand that's been around for a long time and a subject like the Proteus and Space: 1999 Eagle where you know there's a demand, it's less of a gamble.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

JeffBond said:


> Interstellar happened because Moebius had a good relationship with Chris Nolan's production company due to their Batman kits--they wanted an Interstellar model out and made it easy for Moebius to do that.


Which begs the question why CBS and Round 2 can't do something like that? It's things like this that convince me that the motivation behind whether a kit gets made or not is solely a matter of personal ambition. If someone wants a kit made, and they have enough clout (and clout = power), then things happen. I suspect it's not that different from the movie business itself. I've seen great screenplays languish in development hell for years, with studios passing on projects because of 'sound business reasons' (i.e. whatever BS excuse they want to use to NOT make something) until, boom, George Clooney or Will Smith decide they're "interested" and suddenly everyone wants to make that movie. For whatever reason, CBS can't get its act together with Round 2 or Revell to make things happen. Meanwhile, Bandai is pumping out new Star Wars kits every month...


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Hunk A Junk said:


> Which begs the question why CBS and Round 2 can't do something like that? It's things like this that convince me that the motivation behind whether a kit gets made or not is solely a matter of personal ambition. If someone wants a kit made, and they have enough clout (and clout = power), then things happen. I suspect it's not that different from the movie business itself. I've seen great screenplays languish in development hell for years, with studios passing on projects because of 'sound business reasons' (i.e. whatever BS excuse they want to use to NOT make something) until, boom, George Clooney or Will Smith decide they're "interested" and suddenly everyone wants to make that movie. For whatever reason, CBS can't get its act together with Round 2 or Revell to make things happen. Meanwhile, Bandai is pumping out new Star Wars kits every month...


Because nobody at CBS/Paramount/Viacom gives enough fraks to do that. And while Jamie may indeed give enough frak, the company just doesn't have the resources and sales performance history to be more than a tiny momentary blip on the radar.

NOBODY at the CBS corporate level is going to stick their necks out for model kits. It's hard enough to get toys made. 

See also all the nonsense that is the now-dead 'Star Trek The Lost Photographs' book. Solicited to street way back August 2015, delayed and delayed and delayed, supposed to street June 7, 2016 and nothing. NOT A THING. Not a word, not a comment, zero communication. Nobody to ask, nothing. 

Bandai and Star Wars is a completely different animal. Disney knows how important merchandising is (even if they make some grand bonehead mistakes) and more importantly, Bandai is a BIG company in Japan, with significant resources and solid sales. In addition, the brand manager assigned to handle the product line is an avowed SF fanboy. I mean serious otaku. (altho Japanese business culture requires him to keep that side masked and buried, it leaks out in his interviews with the model building community  ) He's listening to the fans (in Japan of course) and getting things done. 

The SW kits didn't HAVE to have Death Star 'tiles' as bases. A generic, plain base would have done the job and save tooling costs. And they SURELY didn't need to make a dang Turbo Laser Tower as an accessory for the A-Wing (and I believe the TIE Interceptor will have it as well), but the brand manager pushed for it because he thought it would be cool. There seems to be resistance at the higher ups to releasing those bases as separate items but the manager knows full well the fans clamor for them. 

But, as discussed, Bandai can do all these things because plastic kit building is still alive and well in Japan, with hundreds if not thousands of local hobby shops, in practically every neighborhood. Even if it's only a shelf at a convenience store, that retailer support is there, feeding customer demand. 

We, sadly, just don't HAVE that top to bottom infrastructure anymore. If there's No Big Money, CBS DOESN'T care. (see what I did there?  )


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Could you imagine if Bandai had a Star Trek license again? The kits they made in 2003 were freakin awesome, especially Voyager. With today's technology, there's no telling how freakin sweet they would be.

That said, the models Round2 have done are cool. I just wish they had the resources like Bandai to pump out ship after ship.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Steve H said:


> NOBODY at the CBS corporate level is going to stick their necks out for model kits. It's hard enough to get toys made.


True, but how do we explain Round 2's Eagle kit? Clearly, there wasn't a parent company pimping a sequel or a new video release or anything. There was no corporate license holder doing... anything, really. Jamie just nagged his bosses and convinced them to do it. The Eagle repops sold well enough, we're told, that it convinced the money people it wouldn't be a disaster, but do the existing Trek kits sell worse than the Eagle repops? Again, I keep going back to the simple formula that things get made because people in positions of power WANT them to get made. In the case of Star Trek, specifically the Kelvin Timeline (TM) ships, I really doubt it's a matter of "would we make money?" or "would we lose our shirts?" I just seems like, for whatever reason, there's no passion on either end to DO anything. So they don't.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Hunk A Junk said:


> In the case of Star Trek, specifically the Kelvin Timeline (TM) ships...


I'd love a Kelvin model kit also, while on that subject. The Franklin looks like it could be a neat NX-01ish era ship too.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Hunk A Junk said:


> True, but how do we explain Round 2's Eagle kit? Clearly, there wasn't a parent company pimping a sequel or a new video release or anything. There was no corporate license holder doing... anything, really. Jamie just nagged his bosses and convinced them to do it. The Eagle repops sold well enough, we're told, that it convinced the money people it wouldn't be a disaster, but do the existing Trek kits sell worse than the Eagle repops? Again, I keep going back to the simple formula that things get made because people in positions of power WANT them to get made. In the case of Star Trek, specifically the Kelvin Timeline (TM) ships, I really doubt it's a matter of "would we make money?" or "would we lose our shirts?" I just seems like, for whatever reason, there's no passion on either end to DO anything. So they don't.


I agree in concept, I think I've said this before. It IS completely a case of having the will to do a thing. 

I believe the 22" Eagle kit is an aberration. I have no proof and I'm sure Jamie would never EVER say I was right, but it really seems to me the main reason it got produced was the modular nature of the original concept, where so many parts could be made from duplicated tooling, thus greatly reducing the upfront cost and increasing the return on investment. I would guess the overall tooling costs were at least half of any other comparable kit. 

Mind, I still lobby for a new-tool 12 inch Eagle. 

but yes, there's no passion. Not for Star Trek. Not what it could be. The new smooth saucer for the 1/350 kit is welcome and desirable, but should have been done years ago. I'd lobby hard for stupid things like a total re-creation of the AMT Enterprise first release version. Not just a reboxing of the current sad multi-altered tooling but honest-to-gosh new tooling of the very first release kit. MAYBE even with some touch-ups like removing the dents on the undersaucer. Maybe. I suppose one could argue for a completely new tool Enterprise in 'AMT scale' using all the new data from the Grand Restoration, I could get behind that.

But if I did THAT? I'd include parts not only for all three versions (pilots 1, 2 and production), I'd also include parts to duplicate the actual filming model, including faux intercooler detail on the inside starboard nacelle, the missing sensor ring support, fake plugs for the lights, ALL that crap. Because I'm insane! 

See, it takes passion and imagination and sadly, not something encouraged regarding the Star Trek license, on either end.


----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

My personal impression is that the Eagle is a design that has a general appeal to SF modelers and the market potential goes wide beyond the handful of modeling fans of the original franchise, while *just another Enterprise* would only be appreciated by hardcore enthusiasts.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Just my opinion here-
Enterprises sell well, that is the reason that subject is offered in so many different scales currently in production.
The NuE is simply ugly- the design is unbalanced. It looks much better on the screen than in your hand. It comes from a film series which slapped beloved canon in the face. The films are fun to watch, but I for one have to turn off my head to enjoy the ride.
The NuE will not sell as well as other Enterprises because most builders are fans of the prime canon. The new films attracted people who never watched much of the older shows/movies and only a small percentage are modelers. 
I do hope a NuE refit is offered for completeness, it will be a business decision depending on the numbers.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

It would be nice if Revell would test the theory that the JJprise won't sell in America by, ya know, actually trying to sell it in America. I mean, we all have our theories about why a ship from one obscure sci-fi series has more sales potential than another ship from an obscure sci-fi series, but here's a case where a model actually exists. There are no prohibitive new tooling costs. They just have to ship it to American stores or make it available (without the inflated overseas costs) through American online retailers. So I'm really REALLY puzzled why they just don't even try. Again, even if there are people who (justifiably) think the design is unbalanced and have problems with the Kelvin Timeline (TM) movies, would the JJprise really sell worse than the LIS Derelict? The Interstellar thing?


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Hunk A Junk said:


> It would be nice if Revell would test the theory that the JJprise won't sell in America by, ya know, actually trying to sell it in America. I mean, we all have our theories about why a ship from one obscure sci-fi series has more sales potential than another ship from an obscure sci-fi series, but here's a case where a model actually exists. There are no prohibitive new tooling costs. They just have to ship it to American stores or make it available (without the inflated overseas costs) through American online retailers. So I'm really REALLY puzzled why they just don't even try. Again, even if there are people who (justifiably) think the design is unbalanced and have problems with the Kelvin Timeline (TM) movies, would the JJprise really sell worse than the LIS Derelict? The Interstellar thing?


I assume it's a licensing issue. I note that R2 hasn't whipped out all those Star Wars kits that MPC made in the '70s to cash in on both nostalgia and the new SW boom. Of course those kits are rather sad compared to the Bandai kits, and I shudder to imagine the MPC Falcon boasting, BOASTING new tool'd parts to make it look like the version in 'The Force Awakens', but luckily that didn't happen.

What COULD have happened is what Tamiya and Revell themselves have done-licensed R2 to release the JJPrise kit in America. 

Both Tamiya and Revell have licensed kits produced by other makers (usually Italiari) for release under their label. Seems a win/win. Revell gets their kit wider exposure, R2 gets product without going thru the expense of development.

But again, something like that takes will and imagination to accomplish.

(note that it would also lay groundwork to 'unify' Star Trek models under one label as Revell could license their Voyager kits as well. Hah, so clearly how insane I've become.)


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Steve H said:


> I shudder to imagine the MPC Falcon boasting, BOASTING new tool'd parts to make it look like the version in 'The Force Awakens', but luckily that didn't happen.


Gawd. But the scary thing is that this is not hard to imagine at all had MPC (or whoever owns those molds) retained the Star Wars license. THAT's what we would've gotten, guaranteed. Because it's easy and cheap and for some reason American makers have a "Those fans will buy anything" mentality. That's what I don't get. In the case of TFA, two companies were given the Star Wars license: Revell and Bandai. Both are foreign owned companies and both produce their kits overseas. Logistically, either one can supply the U.S. market, but it's Revell's inferior kits that were stocked at Targets and Walmarts and HobbyLobbys when the film opened, not Bandai. Is Bandai just not interested in selling to U.S. consumers except as imports or is Revell just THAT good at gobbling up the market? How hard is it to print Bandai boxes and instructions in English and ship them to the U.S.???

When it comes to the JJprise, they have a fairly decent kit (accurate proportions, good details, good size) but they just can't put it in U.S. consumers' hands because... what, an agreement that Revell will only sell the kit overseas? Why MAKE that agreement in the first place when Star Trek's primary audience is in the U.S.?!?!


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Well, Revell USA has just announced their final list of kits for 4th Quarter 2016 and there is no mention of an Enterprise. Revell Germany announced their 2016-2017 schedule some months back.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Hunk A Junk said:


> Gawd. But the scary thing is that this is not hard to imagine at all had MPC (or whoever owns those molds) retained the Star Wars license. THAT's what we would've gotten, guaranteed. Because it's easy and cheap and for some reason American makers have a "Those fans will buy anything" mentality. That's what I don't get. In the case of TFA, two companies were given the Star Wars license: Revell and Bandai. Both are foreign owned companies and both produce their kits overseas. Logistically, either one can supply the U.S. market, but it's Revell's inferior kits that were stocked at Targets and Walmarts and HobbyLobbys when the film opened, not Bandai. Is Bandai just not interested in selling to U.S. consumers except as imports or is Revell just THAT good at gobbling up the market? How hard is it to print Bandai boxes and instructions in English and ship them to the U.S.???
> 
> When it comes to the JJprise, they have a fairly decent kit (accurate proportions, good details, good size) but they just can't put it in U.S. consumers' hands because... what, an agreement that Revell will only sell the kit overseas? Why MAKE that agreement in the first place when Star Trek's primary audience is in the U.S.?!?!


There's a lot to unpack here, some apples, some oranges and maybe a pineapple. 

Bandai would LOVE to release their Star Wars kits in America. LOVE TO. Bandai has been fruitlessly seeking mainstream entrance to the American market since 1982, both in toys and the plastic kit hobby. They have had some success in toys (1992, Power Rangers) but plastic kits, zero. Their biggest push was in 1998 when Gundam Wing aired on the afternoon kidvid time slot on Cartoon Network's Toonami, a trickle of 'Gunpla' made its way to Toys R Us and other stores and made a resounding thud, due mainly to overpricing on Bandai's part. (Bandai sold the kits at retail prices to everyone which resulted in inflated retail prices. $18 for a kit that retailed for around $9.00 USD in Japan was the shelf price. This is a business practice they learned in the early '80s from their graymarket partner in America but that's a huge digression  )

Bandai picked up their models and left the U.S. around 2001 due to some really crappy timing of a specific Gundam series and the harsh evil of the 9/11 attack. Blah blah.

So, again, with an nominally not-Japanese partner (Bluefin and man, I've got a huge essay on them lined up  ) Bandai is testing the waters again, getting Gunpla in Barnes and Nobel and service to the general hobby shop trade, but the prices are still inconsistent and somewhat high, not as bad at that early '90s failure but noticeable. So, yes, the Star Wars kits were kinda sorta desired to come over here. Then the embargo reared its head. Nobody will actually say exactly WHY it exists- is Bandai holding an 'Asia Only' license? Does Revell have sole ownership of the rights in the U.S. of A.? Nobody knows and nobody is saying. 

So that's apples.

Oranges, we don't know the situation concerning Round 2, Revell and the Star Trek New Movies license. We do know that Round 2 DID hold the license for a time but SOMETHING killed the deal. It could be the deal wasn't actually finalized when they started prototyping, it could be the delays R2 was having made Paramount unhappy and yanked the rights, it could be Revell Germany puffed their chest and offered to pay much more for the rights. We don't know. 

What we do know is that the JJPrise kit is an expensive import. Revell USA has expressed no interest in even trying to bring it over. R2 has made no comment about the idea of approaching Revell about sub-licensing the kit to get it released here.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

The maddening disparity right now, it seems to me, is that the companies with the best creative vision and artistic execution (which is what the hobby is supposed to be about) are somehow locked out or otherwise prevented from selling their superior products while the companies (Revell, Round 2) that DO have market penetration seem much better at gobbling up licenses and fighting to protect them (and, I'm sorry, Revell was absolutely behind the Bandai embargo) than they are motivated to create good products.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

From what I remember, Round 2 did have the license for the NuTrek kits but the NuE took far too long to get into production- by the time the kit was ready to go the license was just about to expire so the kits made would not be able to be sold. It was going to be a big kit- the saucer was divided up into pie slices.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Well, I hope if Revell doesn't make a model kit of the Franklin, which doesn't look likely, that a garage kit maker will. It looks really cool from behind in this TV spot...


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Daniel_B said:


> Well, I hope if Revell doesn't make a model kit of the Franklin, which doesn't look likely, that a garage kit maker will. It looks really cool from behind in this TV spot...


(clip snipped for people's bandwidth  )

Man, sure looks like the JJPrise version of the NX-01. It also looks a LOT like that ship in the opening credits of 'Enterprise'.

Oh, lordy, watch it be their version of a Romulan Warbird.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Steve H said:


> (clip snipped for people's bandwidth  )
> 
> Man, sure looks like the JJPrise version of the NX-01. It also looks a LOT like that ship in the opening credits of 'Enterprise'.
> 
> Oh, lordy, watch it be their version of a Romulan Warbird.


It is related to the NX family. It's the first Warp 4 ship, whereas the NX-01 was the first warp 5 ship.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Hunk A Junk said:


> The maddening disparity right now, it seems to me, is that the companies with the best creative vision and artistic execution (which is what the hobby is supposed to be about) are somehow locked out or otherwise prevented from selling their superior products while the companies (Revell, Round 2) that DO have market penetration seem much better at gobbling up licenses and fighting to protect them (and, I'm sorry, Revell was absolutely behind the Bandai embargo) than they are motivated to create good products.


Assuming you're throwing Bandai in the mix as a 'high water' mark... the core problem is all three companies (Revell, Round 2 and Bandai) have completely different outlooks regarding their product.

Bandai has been working for the past 30-some years to make their product appealing to both the casual builder and the fanatic. It started way back when with 'System Injection', the ability to 'pre color' some parts by the use of colored plastic. The earliest was the use of 'one color' trees, white parts would be white plastic, red parts would be red plastic and so on. Then came the double whammy of not only putting multiple colors on ONE sprue tree (White, Red, even clear!) but actually molding some parts in multi-colored plastic! Mind, they don't do that specific technique anymore, or not so much, but the technology IS used in a weird but cool 'multi plastic type' molding, where they inject Polystyrene and ABS to create 'skeletons' of pre-assembled moving joints which one then attaches the various plastic bits to complete the model. 

(Disclaimer, Bandai doesn't seem to make 'real' subjects as plastic kits anymore, totally concentrating on genre subjects. I'd like to see what Bandai could do with, say, a pre-colored snap fit 1/48 scale P-51D Mustang.) 

And it all serves the ideal of giving the customer a pleasing finished product regardless of the skill level ability to 'finish' a kit.

Revell, it seems to my eyes, is stuck in the '70s. 'Real' subjects get the maximum treatment, making nice displays. Their search for quality goes to leasing molds from other companies (generally Italiari). But Genre kits, those are toys, not worthy of that same dedication or attention to detail. As long as it looks kind of like the subject that's good enough because who cares, it's not SERIOUS, it's only Star Wars. (and I'd still like to know the story behind the choices that led to that rather terrible TOS Enterprise.)

Round 2, they've got so much going on and such seemingly limited resources, coupled with the problems inherit with dealing with a Chinese 'turn-key' factory to actually realize the product.. honestly, I'm astonished they get ANYTHING done. But their core culture seems to believe that what they make are boutique, niche products (which IS true) so they're not really gonna worry, because they know that if they set their goals low they can always achieve them. 

(my example: The 22" Eagle is pretty cool and it seems to have sold well. I argue that had they made the same kit but at 12" the smaller size and lower pricepoint they could have sold at least 10 times what they've done. Big kits with big prices limit sales, especially worldwide.)

Different companies, different corporate ideals and culture. They each believe that they have the right formula for corporate success.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Revell's TOS Enterprise and Klingon kits were made from taking EVERY version of the ship out there (all miniatures and the Animated show renderings), smooshing them together and coming up with a hybrid design which does not match any of the references but has elements of them. I could not handle what they did to the Enterprise, but I did pick up a D-7 to modify into a ship half way between the TOS version the the TMP version.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Bandai just relased an ISS astronaut so I wouldn't say they don't do real subjects.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

djnick66 said:


> Bandai just relased an ISS astronaut so I wouldn't say they don't do real subjects.


Was that a kit or a figure/toy? Because they do still dabble, toy-wise. They did a massive, expensive Saturn V and a research submersible that I guess is famous in Japan. 

but they haven't made any aircraft or warship models for a LONG time.


----------



## Xenodyssey (Aug 27, 2008)

I have the Bandai ISS Astronaut. It's a kit but some people complained about the hinging making it less realistic. I like it and it's a fun kit to build with working lights.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Xenodyssey said:


> I have the Bandai ISS Astronaut. It's a kit but some people complained about the hinging making it less realistic. I like it and it's a fun kit to build with working lights.


I can't find info on this. Is this a recent kit or some time back?

Edit: Found it! Man, almost anything can be found at Amazon, huh?
https://www.amazon.com/Bandai-Hobby...d=1468531680&sr=1-1&keywords=bandai+astronaut

So, 2012 release. Looks to be the same idea as the Bandai Star Wars figure kits. Looks cool, I'll have to keep an eye out for a cheap one sometime.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Just saw Beyond: Revell Germany really dropped the ball on this one! Two Enterprise variants and the USS Franklin? Dang, hope someone else gets the Movie license! Perhaps, our favorite garage suppliers will make great parts to adapt and modify the 2013 Darkness Enterprise.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

charonjr said:


> Just saw Beyond: Revell Germany really dropped the ball on this one! Two Enterprise variants and the USS Franklin? Dang, hope someone else gets the Movie license! Perhaps, our favorite garage suppliers will make great parts to adapt and modify the 2013 Darkness Enterprise.


Moebius now has the license to make models from the new movies!
http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/275-m...els-produce-trek-ship-models.html#post5981033


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Richard Baker said:


> Moebius now has the license to make models from the new movies!
> http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/275-m...els-produce-trek-ship-models.html#post5981033


Awesome! Do you hear that sound, Round 2? It's your wake up call.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

That's interesting, dare I say fascinating news. Again, not a fan of the JJPrise but good for those that are. 

What will be the telling point is execution. How quickly can Moebius get the kit to market? How much frogging around will Paramount put them thru in terms of licensor approval? Will this end up being what I suggested earlier, simply Moebius sub-licensing the Revell Germany kit and not a new-tool model? Will that lead to a massive sigh of disappointment from the Trek modeling community?

There's many questions and probably not gonna be too many answers for some time. Let me suggest that if we see a solicitation for a kit release around Dec/Jan I would wager it's a re-pop of the Revell Germany kit.


----------



## pagni (Mar 20, 1999)

Hunk A Junk said:


> Awesome! Do you hear that sound, Round 2? It's your wake up call.


Uh..more like a death knell...


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

So it seems at SDCC they stated they're doing 4 ships. That's an ambitious slate, I'm guessing they're not all going to be $100 and up large kits. If they did the JJPrise in 1/1000 that would be OK. Not my cuppa but at least it would be consistent. 

But then again, if it takes them 3 years (or more or never) to crank out the kits...


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Steve H said:


> So it seems at SDCC they stated they're doing 4 ships.


What 4? I assume JJprise, Kelvin, Vengeance, and Franklin?


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Hunk A Junk said:


> What 4? I assume JJprise, Kelvin, Vengeance, and Franklin?


1. U.S.S. Enterprise (Beyond Refit 1701 and not 1701-A) 
2. Kelvin 
3. Franklin 
4. Spock's Jellyfish from 2009.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Daniel_B said:


> 1. U.S.S. Enterprise (Beyond Refit 1701 and not 1701-A)
> 2. Kelvin
> 3. Franklin
> 4. Spock's Jellyfish from 2009.


Is that an official list? Because Spock's Jellyfish is a Kazon torpedo kit: a curiosity that few are actually clamoring for. I would also hope that the 1701 kit had option parts to make the 2009 version too. I suppose we already have the Revell, but if the Moebius kit is superior then it would be nice to have the option. I'd rather them put extra effort into the 1701 kit and lose the Jellyfish.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Hunk A Junk said:


> Is that an official list? Because Spock's Jellyfish is a Kazon torpedo kit: a curiosity that few are actually clamoring for. I would also hope that the 1701 kit had option parts to make the 2009 version too. I suppose we already have the Revell, but if the Moebius kit is superior then it would be nice to have the option. I'd rather them put extra effort into the 1701 kit and lose the Jellyfish.


Their display from Comic-Con. The kits are slated to arrive in 2017.


----------



## TomD66 (Apr 25, 2009)

I was looking around on ebay and I see a couple of sellers offering a Revell TOS and the JJprise in a 50th anniversary two-for kit. Has anyone else seen this?


----------



## Daniel Kaiser (Jan 22, 2015)

Daniel_B said:


> 1. U.S.S. Enterprise (Beyond Refit 1701 and not 1701-A)
> 2. Kelvin
> 3. Franklin
> 4. Spock's Jellyfish from 2009.


Have you seen the movie? The 1701-A is an improvement over the previous designs. Wider dorsal flared out like the D, nacelle pylons moved forward and thicker, the nacelles look less spud like, don't quote me on this but I had the impression that the secondary hull looked a bit larger and shorter.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Also, the phaser arrays on the 2013 Refit: there are six, upper and lower saucer. And, though, not clearly seen, the engine pylons are swept back on the Refit. The engines look the same, the best I could see. There is an external shot following running crewmen, during the attack, that looks like 3 extended oval windows where the lower 3 round ports used to be just above the lower central dome. And I noticed what looks like 4 more square windows on the lower saucer edge, added to the window arrays already there. Four to each end.

Noticed the 1701A impulse vent is not as wide as the JJRefit. Also seemed the "reactor loops" or whatever at the top back of the warp engines looked a lot like the tubular ones on the TOS, only lit up. The side of the saucer is distinctly angled, without the excessive rounding on the 2009/2013 versions.
The 1701A does not appear to have a hood over the Bussards, and a very beefy pylon connection. I could not make out whether the dish is integral with the engineering hull. Hard to tell, as it happened so fast!


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

The Moebius model looks like the 2009 Enterprise, not the Refit. If you look closely at it and the pic of the Refit, you'll the window differences, among other things.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

The one on display is Lou Dalmaso's Revell JJprise. They might have just had it as a placeholder for something to show. That is, unless they are going to repackage and sell Revell's JJprise. It's unknown right now whether the Enterprise will be new tooling or not. Hopefully it is.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Well, okay, that makes sense, then. Yes, I would definitely prefer new tooling!


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Burning question: Will the Jellyfish kit include a motor for the spinning effect? More burning question: Are we really calling this ship "Jellyfish"? Burning and itching question: Which would sell better: the Jellyfish or the Into Darkness Klingon Bird of Prey?


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Don't know how it got the name "jellyfish". I expect it could be motorized. The LIS Derelict looks adaptable to motorizing the six jaws (?). I would have to look at Into Darkness to see the Klingon ship.


----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

There was an impressive motorized scratch-build Jellyfish at the RPF (video link at the 3rd page):

Star Trek "Jellyfish" scratch

The Into Darkness Bop would be a feast for the photo etch suppliers.


----------



## borz666 (redux) (Jul 4, 2016)

I'm really not sold on the Jellyfish ship. It just seems like a massive waste of tooling for what is essentially another Kazon torpedo or Scorpion. Please Moebius don't waste the time effort and money on a shelf warmer!!


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Hunk A Junk said:


> Burning question: Will the Jellyfish kit include a motor for the spinning effect? More burning question: Are we really calling this ship "Jellyfish"? Burning and itching question: Which would sell better: the Jellyfish or the Into Darkness Klingon Bird of Prey?


It's not an uncommon practice to release the "hero" or "good guy" ships first to get a feel for the market. 

I for one would love one of the hive ships from Beyond. and then the BOP from Into Darkness. 

but let's show support for the first wave of releases:grin2:


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Definitely! Vote with our wallets! Would enjoy the Into Darkness E-Refit and the 1701A in Beyond.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

charonjr said:


> Definitely! Vote with our wallets! Would enjoy the Into Darkness E-Refit and the 1701-A in Beyond.


Sadly the 1701-A isn't currently on the roster for Moebious. I would say they might wait until Star Trek 4 to do that one.

However, this weekend Star Trek Beyond took a staggering 69% drop in box office revenue. It's questionable now if Star Trek Beyond will eek out a profit. If it doesn't, there may not be a Star Trek 4, and therefore may not be a model of the 1701-A


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Damn. I thought 4 and 5 were contractually obligated with the actors. Oh well. Gonna have to make my own then.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Some actors ha e signed on for ST4, the fifth movie is still speculation


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

charonjr said:


> Damn. I thought 4 and 5 were contractually obligated with the actors. Oh well. Gonna have to make my own then.


Each new entry in the NuTrek verse is having diminishing returns at the box office, at least domestically. Beyond is performing about 15% lower than Into Darkness.

While a 4th one has been announced, that isn't a guarantee it will be made. Paramount probably wants to make it, but if Beyond doesn't pull a profit, they might change their minds. That really bums be out, because while I really didn't care for Star Trek 2009 and aboslutely hated Star Trek Into Darkness, I felt that Beyond was starting to right the ship. I'm actually looking forward to another one, which is something I couldn't say before Beyond.

There have been many films "greenlit" that were later canceled. The recent Amazing Spider-man 3, and Sinister Six movies come to mind. They were announced, and months later canceled.

I hope Beyond can at least break even at the box office. Maybe they can pull a profit on Blu Ray and video streaming releases. If they can eek out a decent profit, maybe the 4th will get made.

I would be shocked if Paramount gave the next one a $185 mil budget again. They'll probably cut the budget down to $130-150 mil.

I just feel like Paramount is trying to make Star Trek a top shelf blockbuster franchise, but that will never happen. The general populace just couldn't give two shits about Star Trek. I think that's sad because Star Trek is the best thing around. But the public doesn't agree.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Daniel_B said:


> Each new entry in the NuTrek verse is having diminishing returns at the box office, at least domestically. Beyond is performing about 15% lower than Into Darkness.
> 
> While a 4th one has been announced, that isn't a guarantee it will be made. Paramount probably wants to make it, but if Beyond doesn't pull a profit, they might change their minds. That really bums be out, because while I really didn't care for Star Trek 2009 and aboslutely hated Star Trek Into Darkness, I felt that Beyond was starting to right the ship. I'm actually looking forward to another one, which is something I couldn't say before Beyond.
> 
> ...


Paramount wants the money but they won't do the work.

That is, finding a director that has a real understanding of Star Trek, hiring a writer that has that same understanding, and giving them the money and time to make that movie. 

They hope for 'Marvel Studios' box office without even trying to put the work in. They think a 'hot now' director is all it requires. What's story? Who needs writers?

Star Trek is sabotaged by its history. I'm sure there's 'embedded corporate knowledge' on how 'difficult' Star Trek is. 

There's very little vision in Hollywood anymore and less every year. With movies commonly spending $200 Million and more, not even including promotion, almost every movie NEEDS to take in half a BILLION Dollars to break even (Hollywood accounting style). And that money just isn't there, not even with China in play. There's no room for vision. It's not in the budget. 

They're putting themselves out of business. The Red Queen's race is moot.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Steve H said:


> That is, finding a director that has a real understanding of Star Trek, hiring a writer that has that same understanding, and giving them the money and time to make that movie.


They did just that hiring Justin Lin to direct, and Simon Pegg to write. The only thing they didn't do was give them enough time. They were on a very tight and compressed schedule. 

It's amazing Beyond turned out as good as it did. It's my favorite of the 3 NuTreks.

However, Trek fans cannot seem to realize that Paramount is NEVER going to make a Star Trek that is similar to the old ones. They are trying to appeal to everyone, so they remove the more cerebral slow paced Star Trek we grew up on. Star Trek, at least the movies, is now an action/adventure franchise like Star Wars. I am ok with that as long as it is done right, like Beyond. I am not ok with it when it comes to the likes of ST2009 and Into Darkness.


----------



## Radiodugger (Sep 27, 2011)

Daniel_B said:


> *The general populace just couldn't give two shits about Star Trek.* I think that's sad because Star Trek is the best thing around. But the public doesn't agree.


Bingo! I am also in that minority. And the public cares even LESS about a masterpiece like Babylon 5! That's my favorite of all time! But I'm an oddball...:freak:

Doug


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Steve H said:


> ...With movies commonly spending $200 Million and more, not even including promotion, almost every movie NEEDS to take in half a BILLION Dollars to break even (Hollywood accounting style)...


Pretty much. When it's announced that the budget for a movie is $200 million, they literally mean that's the amount of money that was spent to _make_ the movie, and it doesn't include the money spent on promotion, marketing, and other costs peripherally connected to the movie. Now, I have no idea how true this is, but I've read that The Suits in Hollywood consider a movie a failure if it doesn't generate approximately _three times_ the stated budget in box office profits. So for a movie like _Star Trek Beyond_ with a reported budget of $185 million, Hollywood considers it a flop unless/until the profits hit the $555 million mark because _that's_ when they break even. Hollywood accounting indeed.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Yes, it USED to be that Hollywood thought a movie had to make double its cost to be 'profitable' (mind, a movie NEVER makes a profit according to the bookkeeping. It's been said that Star Trek is still paying for the work done on Phase II. Which was folded into the TMP budget. yeah. Hollywood.) but now somehow they say it needs triple. 

Makes no sense. by this accounting only 2 or 3 movies meet that goal a year. 

Cripes, in 1963 Cleopatra cost 20th Fox about $31 million (and that's really big money back then. Really big. Like Cameron's Avatar big) and it just about bankrupt the studio. Now, I bet some of these movies spend $31 mil just on craft services (i.e. food) and the team of accountants counting everything. 

Altho I found this little quote: "An article in the Chicago Tribune, dated June 24, 1963, says that Fox studios had to file final [accurate] "Cleo" cost figures in California for tax purposes. They report that the total is closer to 25 million dollars as opposed to the widely publicized 40 million. "

Which means that contrary to popular thought, it DID make a profit during release and couldn't have be the disaster claimed. 

So, damn Hollywood accounting anyway.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

If the Hollywood movie studios were really losing as much money as they claim, they'd all be out of business.


----------



## Captain Robert April (Jul 5, 2016)

Remember that the theatres get part of the box office take (roughly half), and some other folks along the way also get a piece of the action (the "investors"). That's why a movie has to make two to three times its budget just in order to break even.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Star Trek is a cash cow for Paramount and CBS. Even if Beyond doesn't make a profit in theatrical release (likely), there's home video, streaming, and other ways the studio recoups its investment. Unlike the majority of releases that come and go, the Trek catalog has big value and even when there's a dud (like, say, Final Frontier) there's always the potential in the next film being a success -- so they'll keep making them. The budgets might shrink, but a tighter budget actually helped Wrath of Khan, so the justification will always be there to try to shake the money tree one more time.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

through accounting tricks the studio claimed that the TOS series never did turn any profit (which they would have to share), even after years of going into syndication.
The first film, TMP, cost an astounding $40 million which in those days was one of the highest costing scifi films ever. Inside that cost was buried the repeated on-again-off-again Star Trek Phase II TV project costs as well. They did recycle some of the set pieces so that made it OK I guess.

I probably won't be part of the box office take on Star Trek Beyond- I simply do not have the cash to spend on watching it in a theater right now. I wish I could, but paying bills and buying food for my family is more important than entertainment. I think I am not the only one in this situation so a lower than anticipated profit does not mean a failing franchise.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Captain Robert April said:


> Remember that the theatres get part of the box office take (roughly half), and some other folks along the way also get a piece of the action (the "investors"). That's why a movie has to make two to three times its budget just in order to break even.


From what I understand, sometime around when Titanic came out all those deals changed, and now theaters make a third or less off the ticket price. In some cases studios demand 100% of the take for like the first two weeks or a month. 

This is part of the reason why concession prices are insane and there's a HUGE push for 'high ticket' options like IMAX, 3-D and that crazy 'noisy vibrating' seat thing. 

Investors usually get their cut off the back end, not upfront in the gross. Usually. There's always exceptions.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

I wish we lived in a world were Star Trek Beyond could pull in $700 million to 1 billion without breaking a sweat. It's certainly better than the mediocre Force Awakens. I say that as a Star Wars fan as well.


----------

