# JJ Abrams' NCC-1701 **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 13, 2008, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538 "2008-11-13T15:30:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Yodalicious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yodalicious/32/8195_2.png) [@Yodalicious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yodalicious)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/1 "2008-11-13T15:30:27Z")
[Whatcha think?](http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2008/11/star-trek-first.html) ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/2 "2008-11-13T15:45:25Z")
[shrug] Looks like the Enterprise. ---
**Author:** ![Spatial\_Rift\_47](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a8b319/32.png) [@Spatial\_Rift\_47](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spatial_Rift_47)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/3 "2008-11-13T15:48:51Z")
> [@JJ Abrams](#): > > “If you’re going to do Star Trek, there are many things you cannot change. The Enterprise is a visual touchstone for so many people. So if you’re going to do the Enterprise, it better look like the Enterprise, because otherwise, what are you doing?” _sigh_ ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/4 "2008-11-13T15:56:58Z")
I don’t like it. The deflector array stands too far forward of the pylon connecting the saucer and drive sections. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/5 "2008-11-13T15:58:30Z")
Pretty. Kinda swoopier, especially where the nachelle pylons attach to the engineering hull, and it gives an impression of mass. Meh. I’m more interested in the plot and acting than the f/x. ---
**Author:** ![Kamino\_Neko](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kamino_neko/32/34_2.png) [@Kamino\_Neko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kamino_Neko)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/6 "2008-11-13T15:59:31Z")
Looks awesome. Keeps the general feel of the Enterprise - dual nacelles, bridge separate from engineering section, deflector dish on the front - but with enough alterations to feel modern-futuristic, not retro-futuristic. Also nicely solid looking - the original Enterprise looked like a good breeze could snap off the nacelles or bridge section. The colour scheme seems stolen from TNG, but it’s neutral enough that it holds even now. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/7 "2008-11-13T16:30:15Z")
Acceptable, and even pretty. I would have preferred that he stick with the original, though. ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/8 "2008-11-13T17:38:16Z")
I like how the “arrowhead” shape gets used in the interconnecting dorsal between the primary and secondary hulls. Nice touch. ---
**Author:** ![Lightray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightray/32/391_2.png) [@Lightray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightray)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/9 "2008-11-13T17:57:22Z")
I think some of the comments are precious. ---
**Author:** ![kasuo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8c91f0/32.png) [@kasuo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kasuo)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/10 "2008-11-13T18:07:21Z")
> [@Szlater](#): > > I don’t like it. The deflector array stands too far forward of the pylon connecting the saucer and drive sections. Yeah, otherwise it would look great. ---
**Author:** ![MacTech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c0e974/32.png) [@MacTech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MacTech)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/11 "2008-11-13T18:33:12Z")
I don’t know, the overall design is kinda’ “Meh” to me, the neck below the saucer section is too far back, and the Bussard Ramscoops on the nacelles look like a hubcap of a '50s car, the nacelles themselves look vaguely “Planet-Killer” weapon shaped, it’s too “melty” looking, too '50s “Art-Deco” ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/12 "2008-11-13T18:37:33Z")
> [@MacTech](#): > > the nacelles themselves look vaguely “Planet-Killer” weapon shaped Yep, I thought that, too. ---
**Author:** ![Hugh\_Jass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/4da419/32.png) [@Hugh\_Jass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hugh_Jass)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/13 "2008-11-13T19:38:51Z")
I didn’t like it. I’ve always preferred the TOS enterprise to all the others. It made me think of sailing ships. Other designs have focused on sleekness too much in my opinion. I don’t like the main hull and the nacelles. Too swoopy, if that makes sense. The hull, the way it slopes in the back is what I don’t like. I would have liked to see only a slight modification of the cigar shaped nacelles and main hull. Also, the “neck” that attaches the circular hull to the main hull seems pushed back, which to me makes it look a little “congested”. I liked having the circular hull jut out more. It looks like they’ve made the circular hull much bigger than the original too. I need to see some pictures from other angles to form a full opinion, though. I do not want to be one of those “It isn’t the Enterprise because it doesn’t have A, B, and C” types though. If they can make the ship a character like they did in the original. I was sad when the ship was destroyed in III. It will depend on the story telling if I end up liking the ship or not. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/14 "2008-11-13T20:01:40Z")
Exactly, **Hugh**. The NCC-1701 was utilitarian in design. That was part of its charm. ---
**Author:** ![Wheeljack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@Wheeljack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wheeljack)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/15 "2008-11-13T20:08:23Z")
Fine, I guess I’ll be the first one to say it… What the hell is this? Are we supposed to believe that in the course of twenty years the Enterprise was completely stripped down and rebuilt **twice** , or are we just supposed to stick our fingers in our ears and pretend that the TOS Enterprise never happened? I’m not having a fanboy freak-out here; I’m completely serious. Does anybody know which it’s supposed to be? ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/16 "2008-11-13T20:10:25Z")
> [@Wheeljack](#): > > What the hell is this? Are we supposed to believe that in the course of twenty years the Enterprise was completely stripped down and rebuilt **twice** …? Yes. Just like the Klingons were. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/17 "2008-11-13T20:28:19Z")
It’s a reboot. That’s OK by me. The ship looks good. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/18 "2008-11-13T20:32:02Z")
A quibble I have with most of the Trek ships: Those curving lines may look pretty from the outside, but how the heck do they fit actual decks where people live and work inside them? For that matter, is there any functional purpose to the hulls having the shapes they do? ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/19 "2008-11-13T20:38:07Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > is there any functional purpose to the hulls having the shapes they do? Yes, but I believe it’s technobabble about warpfields and how they’re formed and maintained. ---
**Author:** ![Lightray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightray/32/391_2.png) [@Lightray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightray)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2008, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538/20 "2008-11-13T20:46:57Z")
> [@Wheeljack](#): > > I’m not having a fanboy freak-out here; I’m completely serious. Does anybody know which it’s supposed to be? It is a reboot given a slender thread to the original series to mitigate fanboy freak-outs. Yes, Leonard Nimoy is in the film. It is not – and never was – going to retell the TOS stories. Quite honestly, I think it is about damn time. The Star Trek franchise has been in need of a serious re-imaging for some time – it has been stale, non-relevant, and cliche-ridden for far too long. If they can make Star Trek relevant to the current generation, they might have a good run of movies again. If they keep themselves bogged down by the sacred cows of Trekkies, it’ll tank. We’ve already seen that. We can see it again, any time we want, in countless formats – syndication, DVD, YouTube, whatever. Been there, done that to death. Plus, fanboys wailing and gnashing teeth just gives me a warm, glowy feeling inside. So, win-win, there. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jj-abrams-ncc-1701/472538.md?page=2)