A reader and regular commenter, SGB, writes:
“What
is your opinion of the Star Trek
production design updates that happened when Paramount/Gene
Roddenberry changed both the interior sets designs and exterior design of the U.S.S.
Enterprise N.C.C.-1701 from the 1966-1969 original series to the William
Shatner/Kirk era 1979-1991 movies beginning with Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)?
The
updates in the designs were completely respectful of the original designs, just
revised due to reflect the realistic passage of time and the refits of
technology that would occur in the fictional Star Trek universe.
I
always felt this new Enterprise in these films actually was
"believable" and looked fully functional, even beautiful from a naval
architect point of view. I will never forget sitting in the movie theater as a
boy on December 7th 1979 watching Star
Trek: The Motion Picture and being in awe of the majestic beauty of the
newly refit U.S.S. Enterprise N.C.C.-1701, simply awesome memories. These production
design changes from the original series to
these films were an excellent example of how to do it right.
As
you have stated, production design is so important to science-fiction. I think
that Paramount/J.J. Abrams learned and did it right too with their U.S.S.
Enterprise N.C.C.-1701 in the Star Trek
2009 and 2013 films.”
SGB,
that’s a wonderful question...and some wonderful memories too.
Sometimes
I have termed the Star Trek movies 1979 – 1991 “my Star Trek” because of
where they happened to fall in my life. The original Star Trek was cancelled
before I was born, and The Next Generation came around when
I was a senior in high school. So it is
the movies that I closely associate with growing up, though of course I watched
the original series in reruns as well.
It
may be part and parcel of these feelings about “my” Star Trek era, but I have
always felt very positively about the upgraded Enterprise interiors and
exteriors, as well as the new Starfleet uniforms. To my eyes, they looked simultaneously more
futuristic and more realistic than their predecessors…and more in the vein of Space:
1999 (1975 – 1977).
My
favorite version of the Enterprise is indeed the one featured in Star
Trek: The Motion Picture. I know
some viewers tend to complain about the length of the dry dock scene with
Scotty and Kirk surveying the great ship, but I have always felt that this
particular moment -- better than any
featured in the preceding TV series -- sells beautifully the size and
grandeur of the starship.
This
is important stuff, because the scenes involving V’ger -- which reveal the Enterprise dwarfed by comparison -- thus sell the
enormity of the film’s menace. In other
words, the Enterprise is huge…and V’ger is absolutely ENORMOUS. Encoded in this
comparison is the sense of alien life being truly alien; of being outside the
realm of human scale. I admire the film’s success transmitting this
notion… especially when so few science fiction films even try.
The
subdued lighting inside the new Enterprise also helps to sell the overall reality
of the starship. Much of the time, Wise’s
camera takes up a “crewman’s eye” position on the bridge that makes us feel
like we’re right there, conversing with the officers and watching events
unfold. The number of insert shots of
view-screens and read-outs further enhances the sense of us being right there
on the Enterprise, receiving and interpreting information.
I
like this approach very much, and the bridge set in the film is so great
because all those displays and graphics actually look real, and the controls
seem functional. That’s not an
observation you can make regarding the TV series bridge and the painted on,
rarely-changing screens.
I
guess I’m in the minority on this, but I also like how sleek, form-fitting,
unisex, and deliberately un-military
the uniforms of Star Trek: The Motion Picture appear. They are simple, elegant and much less garish
than their predecessors (again reflecting a shift towards Space: 1999 and minimalist
1970s aesthetics…). For me, the TMP
uniforms signal visually the “equal” nature of all demographics (male and
female, alien and human) in Starfleet.
No more mini-skirts.
Star
Trek: The Motion Picture
is much-criticized, but I agree with your assessment. I feel that the costumes,
miniatures, and sets all successfully broadcast the impression of a real
starship and starship crew living in a future age. At times, accordingly, the film boasts an
almost documentary-like quality. What The
Motion Picture forsakes in fistfights, phaser battles and conventional
thrills, I feel it gains in verisimilitude.
In
terms of the new Star Trek movie, I give lots of credit to J.J. Abrams and his
team for really “owning” the original TV uniforms and making them look good on
the big screen. I just have to think
there was probably a tremendous creative push to replace the original uniforms
with a sleeker, less garish color scheme, but god bless Abrams, he didn’t
succumb to that pull.
The
new bridge looks futuristic, but in broad strokes the lay-out is the same, with
the familiar captain’s chair, front console, and turbo-lift. And I absolutely love that the original “chirping”
sound-effects from the series were retained.
In some sense, that affectionate and faithful touch “sells” the new
bridge design for me.
I
don’t know that I possess the deep well of affection for the new Enterprise
exterior and interior designs that I do those of the Motion Picture Era, but I
nevertheless count them a success. The
ship felt like Star Trek to me, only Star Trek re-interpreted for the 21st
century.
Again,
I’m sure there was a considerable pull to go “gritty and dark” and make the
Enterprise more submarine-like and less clean and bright, for instance.
I’m
glad the filmmakers didn’t succumb to that urge.
Great
question, my friend.
Don’t forget: ask
me a question at Muirbusiness@yahoo.com
John thank you for answering my question with your insights. The Star Trek franchise both then in 1979 and now in 2013 is in good hands.
ReplyDeleteSGB