Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

20 posts in this topic

One of the ways J.J. Abrams' reboot of "Star Trek" in 2009 differentiated itself from the previous TV and movie incarnations was its massive scale. Everything in the movie was bigger than we'd seen before: the action, the special effects, and even the interior of the Enterprise itself.

So how did they create the inside of an enormous spaceship? Why, with beer, of course.

For scenes in the engine room of the Enterprise, Abrams wanted a gigantic, open space that looked entirely different from the smaller soundstage sets that had traditionally been used in "Star Trek." So the crew traveled just north of Los Angeles to the Anheuser-Busch brewery in Van Nuys, California, where they produce Budweiser and other labels of beer. The plant has a total floor area of 1.7 million square feet, bigger than any soundstage in the world.

"J.J. wanted the engine room to be impressive, almost like the guts of the Titanic," said Simon Pegg (Scotty in the film) on the "Star Trek" Blu-ray. "The Enterprise is massive; it's a big, big, big ship, so the drive for it has to be a significant piece of engineering." Different sections of the location stood in for a variety of decks on the ship. But since it was a real, working plant, it didn't have all the luxuries of a Hollywood backlot. The area with the giant tanks where Uhura is first stationed was refrigerated to near freezing temperatures, while the powerhouse where Scotty gets stuck inside a water tube was miserably hot and so loud the crew had to wear ear protection.

For this summer's sequel, "Star Trek Into Darkness," the filmmakers went to a new location that was quite a bit more high-tech and in line with the scientific ideals of "Star Trek": the National Ignition Facility (NIF), the world's largest laser, at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Located about 45 miles outside of San Francisco (which is the future home of Starfleet Command), the NIF has a system of 192 laser beams that are able to generate temperatures of over 100 million degrees to study photon science and the nature of anti-matter (sound familiar, Trekkies?).

The NIF is a classified government facility that doesn't make a habit of letting movies shoot inside, but they made a special exception for "Into Darkness." J.J. Abrams said, "We were there just trying to shoot a movie, but all around us, these innovative scientists are working on technologies that will likely help the whole world." Abrams said he was intrigued not just by the work being done at NIF to develop renewable, clean energy sources, but at the influence "Trek" had on people's lives. He said, "So many people told us Star Trek inspired them to get involved in science."

Of course, much of the interior of the ship still had to be built as sets on stages, but even those were expanded for the sequel. In the first "Star Trek," the different sections like the bridge, transporter room, and medical bay were built separately, and the camera had to cut to go from one to the other. But this time, they were connected to create one seamless ship. ?On this film, we really had the full playground,? said Chris Pine, who once again plays Captain Kirk. ?We had construction guys working seven days a week, 24 hours a day, just so we could have this totally immersive world to be in."

They also built sets that could mechanically tilt for a sequence where the damaged Enterprise begins to fall out of the sky. Simon Pegg said, "It was all done with wires combined with a tilting set, so we were actually, literally running on the walls sideways... It was enormous fun to shoot, to constantly be reorienting our sense of what?s up and what?s down." Obviously, they've come a long way from the original "Star Trek" series where the camera would shake and the actors would throw themselves out of their chairs and onto the floor.

more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They also built sets that could mechanically tilt for a sequence where the damaged Enterprise begins to fall out of the sky. Simon Pegg said, "It was all done with wires combined with a tilting set, so we were actually, literally running on the walls sideways... It was enormous fun to shoot, to constantly be reorienting our sense of what?s up and what?s down." Obviously, they've come a long way from the original "Star Trek" series where the camera would shake and the actors would throw themselves out of their chairs and onto the floor.

No..........

Ships have artificial gravity there is no reason why the ship orientation relative to yourself should be any different than you standing on the ground.

The best thing about Trek is the tech, JJ is throwing it all out the window so he can have "cool" set pieces.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if I'm a fan of the reimagined engineering sections. I sort of liked the concepts they originally had for it. I read that the reason they didn't go with any of these was simply budget:

USS_Enterprise_engineering_concept_1.jpg

USS_Enterprise_engineering_concept_2.jpg

USS_Enterprise_engineering_concept_3.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well i remember in all the new enterprise episodes and voyager the grav plating was the first thing to go offline after the ship being hit so .... no artificial gravity on a falling ship heavily damaged ( seems logical :p )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything but the brewery. IMHO that was the worse set decision for the first move; the size of the room didn't fit the dimensions of the ship it felt so out of place.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No..........

Ships have artificial gravity there is no reason why the ship orientation relative to yourself should be any different than you standing on the ground.

The best thing about Trek is the tech, JJ is throwing it all out the window so he can have "cool" set pieces.

Maybe the inertial dampeners were offline lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No..........

Ships have artificial gravity there is no reason why the ship orientation relative to yourself should be any different than you standing on the ground.

The best thing about Trek is the tech, JJ is throwing it all out the window so he can have "cool" set pieces.

Nonsense. Star Trek canon has long established that inertial dampers and artificial gravity do not entirely negate physics and when they are damaged?as is the case here?they cease to protect from outside forces. JJ Abrams has been great for the franchise and I say that as someone who has watched every episode of every series (TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT) and every film.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not entirely but I don't recall a movie or episode where a ship is crashing where people were holding onto walls and chairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Scotty -- we need more beer to the shields !" :wacko:

th?id=H.4918086393594363&pid=15.1&H=117&W=160

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not entirely but I don't recall a movie or episode where a ship is crashing where people were holding onto walls and chairs.

its cheaper to shake the camera :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty cool. I'm looking forward to that movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not entirely but I don't recall a movie or episode where a ship is crashing where people were holding onto walls and chairs.

There are plenty of episodes where people are sucked out into space and fall out of their chairs. I don't know what episodes your watching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some cool info. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not entirely but I don't recall a movie or episode where a ship is crashing where people were holding onto walls and chairs.

Oh really? :p

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the brief 70's cartoon Star Trek, they did show the artificial gravity fail, and the crew floating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsense. Star Trek canon has long established that inertial dampers and artificial gravity do not entirely negate physics and when they are damaged?as is the case here?they cease to protect from outside forces. JJ Abrams has been great for the franchise and I say that as someone who has watched every episode of every series (TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT) and every film.

Sorry I disagree, by his tampering with the series he just wrote the franchise into a corner they will not easily be able to write themselves out of. He has destroyed the series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry I disagree, by his tampering with the series he just wrote the franchise into a corner they will not easily be able to write themselves out of. He has destroyed the series.

Tampering? He managed to effectively reboot the franchise without affecting existing canon, making significant changes to both the prime and altered timelines. It was the most successful Star Trek movie in history and he has introduced it to a new generation. It obviously had a different tone to the TV series but that was true of previous movies, whether you're talking about The Voyage Home or First Contact. The Star Trek brand was starting to become stale?the last TNG movie was a disappointment and ENT was cancelled because of lack of interest?and JJ Abrams has managed to turn that around.

My hope is that the renewed interest in the Star Trek brand will result in a new TV series, as I have always found the multi-episode / multi-series arcs to be the most compelling (DS9 was exceptional in that regard). The films?by virtue of the format?are typically too action orientated. Don't forget that the first film had to introduce a new crew and ship, something that none of the previous Star Trek movies had to worry about (being extensions to the series) - that was always going to limit the amount they could introduce without it becoming overly convoluted.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No..........

Ships have artificial gravity there is no reason why the ship orientation relative to yourself should be any different than you standing on the ground.

The best thing about Trek is the tech, JJ is throwing it all out the window so he can have "cool" set pieces.

Enterprise is in orbit falling towards Earth, so it IS affected by gravity.

Secondly, the engineering scenes felt like a massive cop-out in the previous film. Sure, it required a much bigger scale, and should have looked more "industrial" but it came off looking like what it really was - a liquid-based production facility. OK, so it was Budweiser in this case (I felt it looked like a water treatment plant). It made the Enterprise (with it's shiny bridge) look like a trumped-up lavatory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh really? :p

I meant with the deck being vertical relative to the person. I dont see people running along the walls in that scene.

Enterprise is in orbit falling towards Earth, so it IS affected by gravity.

Secondly, the engineering scenes felt like a massive cop-out in the previous film. Sure, it required a much bigger scale, and should have looked more "industrial" but it came off looking like what it really was - a liquid-based production facility. OK, so it was Budweiser in this case (I felt it looked like a water treatment plant). It made the Enterprise (with it's shiny bridge) look like a trumped-up lavatory.

Enterprise is affected by gravity yes but the ship has artificial gravity deck plating.

As for liquid production facility, they have replicators and protein resequencers that turn matter into whatever you want including water, they also have sonic showers, there is no need to have water pipes running through the ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW really. I thought it was a great reboot. The series was failing!!! The last show got canceled for lack of interest. He turned it around. Big bucks for the big wigs means more movies. I want to see him destroy this one and make bigger ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.