digg

Join DiggAbout
See the original image at aintitcool.com

1st Look at Shuttles & Shipyards from 'Star Trek'!

aintitcool.com — These photos offer our best sense to date of the film's aesthetic - this is our first look at a shuttle from the project, our first good close-up of a uniform top, our first hint at the new eye candy (control panel display graphics), signage, etc.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • DeepFriedFetus, on 03/27/2008, -5/+29Beam me the ***** up.
  • allaboutdatiki, on 03/27/2008, -4/+14paramount popped the toaster :-p
  • awhite2600, on 03/27/2008, -1/+29Did the pics get mirrored anywhere before the original site was forced to take them down?
  • provost, on 03/27/2008, -14/+1*****
  • alpha19, on 03/27/2008, -2/+115Mirror: http://tinyurl.com/3284dy
  • schizogony, on 03/27/2008, -4/+47I miss the 24th century so bad.
    • natchiketa, on 03/27/2008, -0/+6i hear ya bro. nothing beats roddenberry's beaming optimism of life in picard's federation. abrams is entertaining as hell, but i hope he understands that that's what trekkers love so much
      • davidwasman, on 03/27/2008, -0/+11The Utopian reality we see in Picard's day may not be visible in this movie only because it depicts an earlier era (kinda like Cochran's day) when the UFP was still learning about diplomacy and...

        FOR THE LOVE OF GOD! Will someone please stop me from geeking out?
      • mike81890, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Its been too long :D
        • edwartica, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2A long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.....oh wait.
  • davidwasman, on 03/27/2008, -2/+21I'm telling you - There's something fishy about a Hyper-Super-Secret guy like Abrams allowing these to be taken.

    I'm still of the notion he's releasing these as a promotional stunt--both to drum up advertising AND to re-assure ST fans that he isn't going to rape the series.
    • bulkhater, on 03/27/2008, -8/+2Oh please, it'll look good, but will be another retread of a Star Trek: Enterprise level FUBAR.
    • aethelberga, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1I'm seeing all these excerpts from interviews with the 'stars', and the main theme seems to be "longtime fans will not be disappointed". It's like they're being told to sneak that into every interview they do, so I agree that it seems Abrams is concerned about the fans' reaction.
      • BoneStamp, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2Yes, actors are always coached on how to promote the movie they're in. In fact, they setup these press events where they will do dozens of these 5 minute interviews for a full day. It's an awesome way to promote a film.
  • curtisag, on 03/27/2008, -4/+12If this movie sucks it's going to kill the Star Trek franchise for good. I hope they don't ***** it up.
    • Wonderama, on 03/27/2008, -0/+7Agreed. Hopefully they realized how badly Lucas screwed a once similarly awesome Star Wars franchise, and they got a clue.
  • SiliconRain, on 03/27/2008, -1/+51"Sadly Removed At The Request Of Paramount - which called incredibly fast"

    You think paramount employs someone to constantly monitor Digg for stuff like this? Man, I would like that job. It's practically my job already...
    • ssn697, on 03/27/2008, -0/+11they wouldn't monitor Digg. AICN WOULD be monitored though...
      • SD70MACMAN, on 03/28/2008, -0/+5Maybe some Paramount employee was "working" hard Digging, came across these, then went "oh *****"
    • dvdchris, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1They took about 24 hours to send me a takedown notice. I guess I'm on their radar now
  • yaddayaddayoda, on 03/27/2008, -1/+6How in the heck are you supposed to wear those 3-point seatbelts? They look like they are upside down. Maybe they were made for Tholians.
    • Kruez, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Looks like you have to put the straps on like a backpack, so the single strap forks right behind your neck.
    • spyd3rweb, on 03/27/2008, -0/+5No inertial dampeners???
    • raydar, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2You can see some slack in the belts behind the seat. So I guess the split portion is much longer than it appears and will go over a person head.
  • esperoboy, on 03/27/2008, -7/+9http://www.flickr.com/photos/25037932@N05/23650835 ...

    :( Does not really look like starfleet console
    and one thing I noticed is everything is made to look so dusty and old. I am sure they are doing it to making it as real as possible but my impression is meeehhh
    • davidwasman, on 03/27/2008, -0/+11It's meant to depict the early days of the UFP. Noone had an issue when they made Cochran a dirty scummy drunk because it fit the times. This may, too.
      • esperoboy, on 03/27/2008, -1/+6OH, I totally love dirty-scummy Cochran, Just as I imagined.
        I know, people will throw rocks at me if I ever say this - but I liked Enterprise, the NASA look & feel ish and I am having hard time imagining that look & feel ends up with the picture I saw.

        But then Paramount is trying to re-brand star trek so I just have to wait n see how it turns out. BUT BAAAHH that interface looks SO cheap >
        • bulkhater, on 03/27/2008, -0/+7I agree that Enterprise LOOKED good, and I think most ST fans will agree too. The problem wasn't the look of the show, but the ***** poor writing, bland plots and cardboard characters. Most of the Fan generated episodes had better writing and acting.
        • davidwasman, on 03/27/2008, -0/+5Just an FYI - Okadu, creator of the LCARS interface you are familiar with, is not a part of this movie-- so they may have had to resort to faking it. Not to mention this would be in an era when LCARS technology was in its infancy. For an good example, check the old TOS series movies. That 'Blue' LCARS was very dated by the time TNG came out.

          Good lord I am a geek.
        • natchiketa, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2@davidwasman: not geeky enough, son! 'okuda' is the name :P
          @bulkhater: i hate it, but you're right. and how about bakula with his 'support the troops' psa's, in a starfleet uniform, no less? *sigh*
      • DaFunk, on 03/27/2008, -0/+5Nothing wrong with adding a little Firefly to Trek :)
    • RetlawST, on 03/27/2008, -0/+10Remember, this could also be some of the training equipment at the academy. I've seen some air-force bases where the junk planes that they teach mechanics on look exactly like this. (minus warp engines)
    • BoneStamp, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1This stuff will look way better when it is properly lit by the lighting techs (for hours) and then processed in post production.
  • nightstar, on 03/27/2008, -6/+1Not much to see...
  • beng123, on 03/27/2008, -2/+9seems like star trek meets BSG...
  • Klarth, on 03/27/2008, -3/+6http://www.flickr.com/photos/25037932@N05/23650835 ...

    Wait... Is that an actual screen? Why would they have built that into the set? Surely it would have been more logical to add those with CGI?

    Someone with the technical knowhow - please explain.
    • alpha19, on 03/27/2008, -0/+6Perhaps they are static images for quick-panning or flash shots to reduce the need for CGI there... and if there is an extended scene near the monitors, they will overlay the screen with some active CGI.
    • davidwasman, on 03/27/2008, -0/+7As a person who has many friends working in CGI, you don't need 'green screens' as much anymore due to pan and scan techniques as well as tracking. You can input coordinates, even when the camera is moving, and it follows the cameras movement to perfection.

      Answer - They can still have the static images and cover them later with CGI.
    • idesign562, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1i agree with both. plus, why would you spend time and 'money" on more cgi where it's not needed?
    • NeoSporin, on 03/27/2008, -0/+6With BSG, they use actual TVs and Monitors built into the set to save on special effects spending.

      It works really great too
    • natchiketa, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1i'm sure that those are lcd's. the only problem with using crt screens in the past was that you had to make sure the film camera's frame rate was in sync with the crt refresh rate, but with lcd's you don't have to worry about that. also, the screens aren't that big, either; looks like a 20-22" widescreen ($200-250) on the right, and a standard 15" ($100) on the left. so you use these for the quick shots, and render high-def for the close-ups.
    • tonicboy, on 03/27/2008, -0/+4nothing looks quite as realistic as reality
    • nydwarf, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Could be there as mock ups so the actors have something to look at.
  • andejp12, on 03/27/2008, -1/+11Dugg just to show Paramount that a couple pictures like this won't stop me from seeing this movie and therefore they should let them be (as I'm sure many people have a copy of them already).
  • bearcat8543, on 03/27/2008, -17/+2Lame.
  • hydroplane, on 03/27/2008, -17/+3Title should read: Get your first look at the last Star Trek before Abrams ruins the franchise.
    • bulkhater, on 03/27/2008, -1/+3Too late. That title could have been used with leaked Star Trek: Enterprise shots.
  • MindTrigger, on 03/27/2008, -3/+2I'm curious if anyone else refuses to look at photos of movies they wish to see, while in production. Kinda ruins it for me. Then again, I also don't care for "making of" or other DVD special features like this. It's a tough line to tow, because I am fascinated by the tech used in movies, but I just can't suspend disbelief once see it.
    • DephexTwin, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1For movies I'm really anticipating, I feel the same way. Mostly because I am worried that just seeing a certain character or setting it will give away some plot twist later in the movie.
  • chanop, on 03/27/2008, -12/+3star wars is better
    • bulkhater, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3Only if you compare Star Trek Enterprise to the prequel Trilogy.
      • 4degrees, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1dont you mean voyager?
        • bulkhater, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Voyager had some good episodes. Enterprise had none.
          • 4degrees, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1not even the episodes in the "mirror mirror" universe? Those episodes alone trump any of the voyager garbage.
  • redwave, on 03/27/2008, -1/+9These photos were taken probably by some dude with a digicam - when the magic of cinematography and lighting are added, they'll look way better. It's already fairly badass, but shot by pros, it'll be even better.
  • seantubridy, on 03/27/2008, -3/+33"But that doesn't look like..."
    "Why didn't they..."
    "I wouldn't have done it like that because..."
    Just shut up and let them make the movie, please.
    • sandman979, on 03/27/2008, -0/+7Amen to that. I guess people are still expecting cardboard control panels and chairs. Let's get real... The original Star Trek series props were incredibly silly looking. An update is required.
  • MysticalMrBiggZ, on 03/27/2008, -5/+1Corporate bastards!
  • humboldt79, on 03/27/2008, -3/+3Still not as cool as that Star Trek band Warp 11. lulz
    http://tinyurl.com/hyke7
    • meed, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2that was lame beyond lame.
    • koft, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1hahah warp 11. Amiga nuts have been jerking off to Kiki Stockhammer for over a decade.
    • CSharpSauce, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1ok.. that was opposite of lame.
  • daxsymbiont, on 03/27/2008, -9/+2trekkies.

    a bunch of mindless jerks that were the first against the wall when the revolution came.
    • bulkhater, on 03/27/2008, -1/+1Browncoats Unite!

      You can't stop the signal!
  • fatb0y42, on 03/27/2008, -6/+3stupid paramont
  • seantubridy, on 03/27/2008, -0/+11I will now proceed to be the most annoying person in the world by telling all of you how good or bad the movie is going to be based on these insignificant photos.
  • bossm4n, on 03/27/2008, -1/+6I bet JJ Abrams is ***** about these leaks, not that I care, but he hates this. Relax JJ. We'll all still pony up our $10 for a ticket.
    • krakkinem, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2meh, JJ Abrams can be ***** all he likes. I'M ***** that Cloverfield sucked.
    • mrhaines, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2He isn't *****. He probably took the photos himself. He is the viral marketing king.
      • ejhdigdug, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1I was going to say the same thing. He probably asked for the photos to be taken down knowing there'd be mirror just to develop more interest.
  • jim1977, on 03/27/2008, -2/+3Worst site ever, but at least the weird obese snake guy was kind of... ***** up and a flashback to Geocities.

    Also, ***** to not ignoring the studio.
    • Kronos6948, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2AICN has been around FOREVER, and really hasn't changed it's webpage format. The GIF in the corner is the guy who heads up the site, done up in whatever animation that the animator felt like putting there. AICN used to be the go to place for movie news, but since Harry has been "taken care of" by a lot of studios, a lot of their reviews are a bit skewed.
  • esperoboy, on 03/27/2008, -0/+5AHHH!!! Now i got it. it's a "SHIPYARD" pictures DUH
    the shuttle is for the shipyard workers, prolly just a transport vessel
  • RockSlice, on 03/27/2008, -1/+8These can't be pics of Star Trek. The Star Trek universe hasn't discovered seatbelts yet
    • warriorscot, on 03/27/2008, -0/+4They have them they are just to cool to use them. It all started when Kirk said ***** this seat belt ***** Im the captain of the ***** enterprise I don't need no goddamn seatbelt to stay in my chair.
  • funkyjunk3, on 03/27/2008, -0/+12backup mirror:
    http://image.bayimg.com/aajekaabe.jpg
    http://image.bayimg.com/aajeeaabe.jpg
    http://image.bayimg.com/aajefaabe.jpg
    http://image.bayimg.com/aajegaabe.jpg
    http://image.bayimg.com/aajehaabe.jpg
    http://image.bayimg.com/aajeiaabe.jpg
    http://image.bayimg.com/aajejaabe.jpg
    http://image.bayimg.com/aajebaabe.jpg
  • Rupan, on 03/27/2008, -2/+3Am I the only one who is kind of worried that this stuff looks too hard sci-fi kind of? Like going for more of a BSG style. Not to mention this stuff looks older and less technologically advanced than that of TOS and even Enterprise which takes place at least 80 years before this movie if I remember my timeline correctly.
    • netwonder, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3Wouldn't this movie take place after Enterprise? Enterprise was before there was a Federation? But I agree the tech looks older than Enterprise.
    • mrhaines, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3Remember JJ Abrams is reinventing Star Trek. I am sure there will be many creative liberties as this is a new revisioning of Star Trek. I hope it really ***** of hardcore trekkies.
    • BaxterK, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2Yes, you are one of the only ones. Scuff that spiffy world up a bit. Everyone's so god-damn sweet in the star trek series, they hurt my dental fillings.
    • mrbitbot, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Isn't this movie supposed to take place before TOS when Spock and Kirk are at the Starfleet Academy? The tech should look older than that of enterprise in TOS.
  • RedSaber, on 03/27/2008, -3/+4Wow, Star Trek will finally look more human.

    Neat.
  • mercano, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2Looks like Paramount sicked the lawyers on them pretty quick.
  • charlietuna, on 03/27/2008, -0/+6I like the look... futuristic but gritty.
  • g30ph, on 03/27/2008, -1/+2That console looks like the best technology available.....in the 1970's. At least the buttons aren't made of rhinestones.
    • Culyt, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Its missing that Atari fake wood paneling.
  • mrhaines, on 03/27/2008, -1/+4I bet JJ Abrams took these photos himself. He is the king of viral marketing.
  • estee065, on 03/27/2008, -0/+5You know whoever the extra is that is taking the pictures will be made to wear the red shirt...
  • omnixero, on 03/27/2008, -0/+9here is the link to google cache which still has the pictures; and if you click to enlarge you get the real link to jpg which were never taken down, just links removed.

    http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:JMr6C2y9eT4J: ...
  • WoundedCow, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3I think I got a chubby looking at them
    • czeman, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1I'd hate to see what happens when you see that LaLa pic!
  • koft, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3These sets look like ***** but what can you expect from camera shots like this? All this will be shot properly and edited and will probably look really nice in the film. Looking forward to the movie.
  • gramophone, on 03/27/2008, -2/+1Dugg for use of the word embiggen.
  • SuperTrozTX, on 03/27/2008, -4/+2Hated it. I always loved Trek because of the sense of awe and the cool tech (not because of the "friendship" between the main characters, that's what daytime TV is for). This is looks way too Mad Max-y for my taste. I want to know what happened after Voyager came back to Earth, not Enterprise II - the Rehash (the teaser trailer looks suspiciously like the pilot for Enterprise the TV Series). Remember Captain Archer? Me neither.
  • Owwmykneecap, on 03/27/2008, -2/+3This movie will blow.

    Give me Picard or Give me Death.
  • Gumby_Mac, on 03/27/2008, -0/+4Ha! Check out the Flickr tags on the "ufpsignsmall" pic here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/25037932@N05/
  • Lobsangrs, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1YOU CAN SEE THE PICTURES HERE: ( all hail the google cache!!!)
    http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:JMr6C2y9eT4J: ...
  • terryhuang, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2Looks like crap so the movie better have an awesome story! *still crossing fingers*
  • BrotherHero, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Now I know what's they've done with the "Back to the Future" ride.
  • Thumper13, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Hello, Computer.
  • Snowli, on 04/04/2008, -0/+0look that's funny
    http://www.spymac.com/details/?2355370
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.