The Into Darkness 1701 refit

[Biggles]

I can't seem to find any clear views of the *initial* refit of the Kelvinverse 1701 as glimpsed at the end of Into Darkness. Obviously it shares the impulse engine design of the Beyond refit, and everything I can find suggests that the long neck and pylons of the Beyond version were done specifically for that movie and weren't on the refit that I'm interested in; making that a truly transitional design (with just new impulse engine(s) and slightly modified nacelles). I can find good views (either official or recreated) of the '09, Beyond and 'A', but not this intermediate step. All I can find is that rear view from the movie (EAS has that comparison shot).

Thanks!

 

[Admiral Archer]

I don't think any exist. Which is a shame, as the Into Darkness refit is the best version of the Kelvin Enterprise IMO.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'm 99% sure it's the regular model with the new impulse deck, the "up close" (taller) bridge window with distorted side dome apertures and missing phaser turrets.

 

[Biggles]

Ah, thank you. So orthos of that would be almost pointless I guess. I did think that the nacelles had been updated too, but I'm not so sure now. The moving components seem to have been there all along (or implied to be). Everything else seems to be how the model was filmed. I hadn't even spotted the bridge changes. I suppose this constant change (three different 1701s plus the A) is the inevitable consequence of doing everything in CG; designers, producers and directors can... 'finesse' designs. We saw it with the 1701-E in Nemesis of course. Eaves tinkering with his own design (I'm glad they didn't include his full-on refit idea for the end of that movie, personally).

It's weird that they bothered to do such a minimal redesign, and then carry over the new impulse deck to the 'stretched' Beyond 1701. I suppose if the original model had been updated to give this revised rear departure shot, it would have been the reference used to stretch the new one.

What's *really* weird is that the justification for the 'A' being so chunky-looking was to address the weakness in the long spindly neck and pylons... which was only there because of the redesign done for that very movie. But, I digress!

 

[publiusr]

I don’t think the -into darkness version had the swept back nacelles, which I liked

 

[captainkirk]

Are there even any good official orthos of the 2009 version? I've only ever seen fan ones.

 

[Biggles]

^this is a good point!

Rewatching the scene, the engines and pylons on the 'mini-refit' are definitely to the '09 proportions and F. King Daniel has summed up the only changes made. In pre-production for Beyond they must have used the revised CGI model as reference, including these changes.

I'm increasingly fascinated by the 'stretched' Beyond 1701 refit. It shows up unannounced and unexplained, despite some major changes (which I must admit I did not notice at the time). Does anyone know of any in-universe (or even fanon) explanation, or do we assume that these changes were retconned into the Into Darkness rebuild? I think I lean toward the latter; we are meant to think it's the same ship that warped off at the end of ID.

 

[Khan 2.0]

Never did get those movie era nacelles, not even on the 'A'

 

[USS Firefly]

What's *really* weird is that the justification for the 'A' being so chunky-looking was to address the weakness in the long spindly neck and pylons... which was only there because of the redesign done for that very movie. But, I digress!

Yeah that was a stupid decision.

One of the reasons I didn't feel anything when they destroyed the Kelvin verse Enterprise was because she changed like five times in three movies

 

[captainkirk]

One of the reasons I didn't feel anything when they destroyed the Kelvin verse Enterprise was because she changed like five times in three movies

This is an annoying trend with a lot of modern effects-heavy movies. They'll remake all the models for each sequel and redesign things unnecessarily each time.

 

[Biggles]

Not to mention we'd seen it all before. Twice. I remember being devastated as a kid that the Enterprise was destroyed in STIII. Then we had the Defiant and Ent-D destruction, and the near-destruction of the Kelvin E in Into Darkness. So when they did it *again* in Beyond I too was fairly indifferent about it, except for being frustrated by it happening yet again and by the plot implications (no E for the whole movie, although I went on to really enjoy the film). They really have to stop destroying hero ships. It's lost all impact.

As for the Beyond refit, the A thread has some decent views;

Fan-made 3D model and ortho views;
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/pot...ternate-enterprise-a-look-like.279532/page-51

PopMech cutaways;
https://hips.hearstapps.com/pop.h-cdn.co/assets/16/25/1466802561-pmx070116startrek-lo.jpg

I think next time I watch ID I will just squint and pretend I'm seeing the Beyond refit Thanks to the angle they used, the only dead giveaway is the much shorter 'neck'.

 

[F. King Daniel]

This is an annoying trend with a lot of modern effects-heavy movies. They'll remake all the models for each sequel and redesign things unnecessarily each time.

But it's okay when they totally change the sets for no reason? Bird of Prey in STIV having a totally different bridge to III, the Enterprise starting V with an entirely different bridge to the end of IV etc.

Nick Meyer wanted bigger changes to the Enterprise for Wrath of Khan, but had to tone it all back because they reused so much FX footage from TMP.

 

[captainkirk]

But it's okay when they totally change the sets for no reason? Bird of Prey in STIV having a totally different bridge to III, the Enterprise starting V with an entirely different bridge to the end of IV etc.

Nick Meyer wanted bigger changes to the Enterprise for Wrath of Khan, but had to tone it all back because they reused so much FX footage from TMP.

That's ridiculous too. But you look at the superhero movies and how they change the suits in every movie and it often feels pointless. Or because a new director comes in and they want to put their own visual stamp on things, which I can understand, and they just tweak things and don't always make it better. I'm not a fan of the changes made in Beyond.

 

[saddestmoon]

The changes do actually mirror the ones made in the TOS movies, IMO - but perhaps with more distinctions made in the Kelvinverse versions, than between the Prime refit / Prime 1701-A (which was more or less visually the same, at least externally).

In the Kelvinverse, the 09 1701 is refit gradually, and perhaps more subtly - and by the time ST Beyond hits, the Enterprise is starting to look relatively different - however it’s destroyed by the Swarm.

The Ent-A is then built and is significantly different to the Refit.

 

[ExtremeSail]

I like the Beyond refit well enough but, man, that neck is so awkward looking (though I do like that it makes the ship look taller and prouder). Should have kept the original neck with (maybe) tweaked proportions. No need to make them look spindly and thin to make them more easily destructible because the Constitution configuration in and of itself is inherently weak at the neck and pylons.

The first trailer had the Into Darkness configuration:

 

[saddestmoon]

^^^ I’ve never noticed that first trailer neck version until just now - good spotting ExtremeSail!

 

[Imaus]

If the NuPrise neck was a bit forward (starting right above the terminus of the deflector) and the secondary hull more barreled towards the rear, it may had looked even beefier....

 

[publiusr]

^^^ I’ve never noticed that first trailer neck version until just now - good spotting ExtremeSail!

Wow, and here I thought I had a good memory

 

[saddestmoon]

TBH, I quite like the 1701 Bey Refit neck.

If I were to change one detail about the Bey refit, it would be to keep the circular primary hull of the saucer edge, instead of pushing the curve out further, just above the impulse drive (in other words, keep the saucer perfectly a circle, as viewed from the top downwards). Note: The drive should still be wider than the 09 version - just not evidenced as a slight bulge from the top view, IMO.

Otherwise, she’s near perfect!

PS: just thought of another small change: from a front / side view of the saucers edge, have the edge angle more like what the Beyond Ent-A has - sharper and more blade-like, rather than the Refits’ slightly sloping angle.

 

[David cgc]

I tend to think of the Beyond version of the ship as being designed in forced-perspective. It looks much longer and sleeker from the front or back, but it's so weird and stubby from the top or side. It feels like the kind of redesign you can only get away with when you know you're only going to have a very limited number of shots with it and can do almost all of them from the ship's best angles.