Star Trek Into Darkness - Images, Videos, Discussion, etc

[Lord Tribble]

Yes, I disagree with the "official" size.

As you may or may not be aware, the 2009 movie contradicts itself in it's own sizing. You correctly pointed out the "huge shuttlebay scene" when Pike, Kirk, Sulu and Engineer Olsen disembark. But again, the -look- of the saucer makes it appear to be close to the same size as the TMP Connie, which used a saucer of a very similar design (including it's 2 rows of windows). Now unless you're gonna claim that the saucer has entire decks with ZERO windows, besides the 2 obvious decks, i'll just conclude that we'll have to agree to disagree.

Why not? There's plenty of other decks with no windows, on all versions of the connie. Posters in that thread I linked have looked at the saucer edge in detail. Not sure which page though, may have been in the 60's region.


Yeah, the saucer was intentionally designed to be reminiscent of the TMP ship, but just because something looks similar doesn't mean they are the same (I'm pretty sure the edge is, relative to the TMP, a bit thicker and rounder with smaller, squarer windows and smaller thrusters(?)). There's nothing there that stops it being 725. Quite the contrary in fact, particularly with the bridge; We get a direct look at a persons size compared to it via the view screen, you can then directly compare that to TMP. The look, as you put it, of many other areas of the ship make it much bigger as well (the aforementioned shuttle bay among other things). Yes it may have been roughly TMP sized at one point in the early development of the film, I fully acknowledge that, but since then it was redesigned and the final design is 725.35 whether you like it or not.


Agreed, I really can't be bothered with a drawn out argument. I'll always go with the official word of the guys who made it; Can't get more definitive than that. To be fair I was against the larger ship at first too (not really sure why now), but further viewing, comparisons and some official numbers (mainly from the bluray and art book) later, I saw no real way or reason to believe other wise.

[Tuskin38]

There is also this, look how small the shuttle is compared to the ship



Back to Refit Changes:

Either the View Screen got bigger or the bridge got smaller. Actually the new exterior view screen matches the physical set better.

Before:



After:


Edit:

Someone on the TrekBBS forums brought it to my attention that the bigger window is also seen earlier in the film shortly before the 'torpedo disarming' scene. I'm assuming it is because its a zoom in shot and using the normal CG model it wouldn't match up with the physical set.

[ShaunKL]

ILM makes all the pretty Star Trek movies... I really want to see more of the refit.  There're so many little things tweaked here and there.

[Tuskin38]

these are very interesting
http://www.kadonaga.net/147068/1461499/set-design-gallery/star-trek-into-darkness
http://www.scottchambliss.com/Scott_Chambliss___Production_Designer/Portfolio/Pages/Star_Trek_2_%282013%29.html

Especially this

[Darkthunder]

Contradictory much?

Enterprise is labeled as the length of the Chrysler Building (which is 319 meters with spire). At the same time, it says "Overall length: 750 meters".

We know the total length of the Golden Gate Bridge is 2737 meters. Lining up the Enterprise side by side, I come to the following image:


which clearly shows the bridge requiring the length of about 3.7 Enterprises. (which comes out to being a length of 750 meter per Enterprise).

Now, either the Enterprise is the length of the Chrysler Building, at 319 meters (close to TMP proportions), or it's grossly oversized, far larger than the Enterprise-D.

Even the Vengeance is mis-labeled, as being "2X Trump Tower". Trump Tower is 202 meters in height. 2 x 202 = 404 meters, which is far from the supposed "1500" meters it should be, if the Enterprise is 750.

Bottom-line: The visuals do not match the scaling of various components on the hull. As such the ship is 300-800 meters in length, whichever you prefer to go by.

[Tuskin38]

That is hilarious.

[ShaunKL]

That is hilarious.

And crazy.

Something must have gotten horribly confused or the associated building titles mean something different than length.  Wasn't that an old addage for the Prime Constitution, that it was comparable to the Chrysler Building?

EDIT:  I just thought of how the Enterprise's bridge set was modified for the Vengeance.  I wonder if they'll use that opportunity to more heavily modify the Enterprise's bridge for the next movie.

[Tuskin38]

Some TrekBBS members think those are Code Names not Length. Nothing on that image says star trek, look at the bottom right, nothing in the project info is Star Trek related.

Based off this image below, the Enterprise in XI was Nicknamed 'Cantina', Kelvin 'Sweet Judy' etc. During Filimg STXI was known as 'Corporate Headquarters' (The CHQ at the bottom of the art). Not uncommon, Return of the Jedi was called 'Blue Harvest' during development.

Though, not that these nicknames would help, if the art was leaked it would be obvious what those ships are, at least the Enterprise. I guess its more for internal document use.

[captain_obvious]

*points to door*

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist!
*uses door*

[Tuskin38]

So Into Darkness confirms the Enterprise in JJ-Verse is also known as a Constitution class. I believe in the first film it was just 'Starship-Class' like in TOS, that what it said on the plaque anyways.

[Shadowknight1]

The "official" size is plain and utter BS. We all knew that. That image just confirms what we always suspected;

The nuEnterprise saucer is virtually the same size as the TMP Enterprise. The image confirms that the saucer "edge" has 2 decks, just like the TMP version.

Ugh...Part of me really likes that image showing the corridor in the hull breach, but...why in the hell does it just confirm 2 decks then?  To me, if there are just two decks, there's a LOT of wasted space in the saucer rim.

Kori, pretty sure the plaque would still say "Starship Class".  I don't know if Constitution-class was ever used on-screen, but the Enterprise 1701 was always called that even when the plaque said otherwise.

[Joshmaul]

Kori, pretty sure the plaque would still say "Starship Class".  I don't know if Constitution-class was ever used on-screen, but the Enterprise 1701 was always called that even when the plaque said otherwise.

My first recollection of hearing "Constitution class" on screen was during the holodeck scene with Picard and Scotty in "Relics".

[Nebula]

The name "Constitution-class" originated with the script for TOS: "Space Seed". Scene 44 of the Second Revised Final Draft for "Space Seed," dated December 13, 1966 has the following content:
44 ANGLE ON SICK BAY VIEWER

It is covered with mathematical symbols and diagrams. CAMERA PULLS BACK to show Khan studying with great concentration. He pushes a button. Another transparency appears: a chapter heading, reading: BASIC SPECIFICATIONS, CONSTITUTION CLASS STAR SHIP.

From memory-alpha

[FarShot]

Ugh...Part of me really likes that image showing the corridor in the hull breach, but...why in the hell does it just confirm 2 decks then?  To me, if there are just two decks, there's a LOT of wasted space in the saucer rim.

Most MSD's budget 3 to 4 meters per deck.  Corridors aren't that tall.

[captain_obvious]

Most MSD's budget 3 to 4 meters per deck.  Corridors aren't that tall.

The decks may include the jefferies tubes, ratways and the like in the 3-4 meter figure.  We may not see them, but they're probably there taking up at least some of the "wasted" space.  The rest of it may be fuel or consumables storage tanks (I'm thinking chemical consumables, liquids and gasses rather than food etc).

[Tuskin38]

From memory-alpha

First on-screen mention was in "The Naked Now"

[Lord Tribble]

Either the View Screen got bigger or the bridge got smaller. Actually the new exterior view screen matches the physical set better.

Yeah, they definitely remodelled the bridge to better match the physical set. The original screen always did seem a bit narrow.

Contradictory much?

Enterprise is labeled as the length of the Chrysler Building (which is 319 meters with spire). At the same time, it says "Overall length: 750 meters".

Could that be referring to the height of the ship? Though code names seem to make a lot of sense, especially for discussing designing these things while trying to keep it all as secret as possible.

Also, looking at these production designs and diagrams, I really hope we get an 'Into Darkness' art book.

So Into Darkness confirms the Enterprise in JJ-Verse is also known as a Constitution class. I believe in the first film it was just 'Starship-Class' like in TOS, that what it said on the plaque anyways.

I like to think that 'constitution class' is the specific ship design which is then a sub-class of 'starship class'; a general classification for a variety of ship classes based on role/function. Dreadnought class would fit in nicely as another general classification.

[Shadowknight1]

My copy of Into Darkness should be here Tuesday!  Nabbed the version from Amazon with the phaser, might post some comparison shots with the original phaser model.

EDIT: ILM sneaked R2-D2 into STID just like ST09!

[Lord Tribble]

If anyone picks up the target version with the exclusive bonus disc, can you let us know if that disc is a bluray? The UK equivalent bonus disc from sainsburys is a normal DVD

[Tuskin38]

Cover for Issue 3 of Khan, pretty cool.