Has anyone else seen this "Phase II" Enterprise??
- Thread starter GeorgeC
- Start date
WinstonWolf359
Master Member
I think had Phase II happened in the mid-70s it probably would have run for two or three years, and then that would have been it for Star Trek. No movies, no additional series, no nothing.
Until the Ben Stiller/Owen Wilson comedy remake came along...
I also agree that many of the scripts that had been written for Phase II seemed pretty bad, but there's no way to know how many of them would have actually seen any airtime, either being extensively rewritten or simply recognized as being THAT bad and put into a desk drawer or the nearest fireplace.
What scares me most is that Phase II probably would have had a very modest budget, and I keep thinking it would have looked like some unholy cross between the cardboard and duct tape sets of Doctor Who and the "hip" disco style of Battlestar Galactica.
In spite of its many failings, I'm really glad we ended up with The Motion Picture and everything that came after it.
Until the Ben Stiller/Owen Wilson comedy remake came along...
I also agree that many of the scripts that had been written for Phase II seemed pretty bad, but there's no way to know how many of them would have actually seen any airtime, either being extensively rewritten or simply recognized as being THAT bad and put into a desk drawer or the nearest fireplace.
What scares me most is that Phase II probably would have had a very modest budget, and I keep thinking it would have looked like some unholy cross between the cardboard and duct tape sets of Doctor Who and the "hip" disco style of Battlestar Galactica.
In spite of its many failings, I'm really glad we ended up with The Motion Picture and everything that came after it.
That's a good point, the fact that Phase II did NOT get made, might have ensured the longevity of Star Trek in a sense. I call this the Edith Keeler Must Die! theory. :lol
If Phase II had aired, maybe it wouldn't have lasted even a season: think about it, Phase II was essentially Season 4 of TOS. Star Trek had gone off the air in 1969. Saturday Night Live had even made fun of it already (1975). Now here it comes back again, in much the same form with the same actors, around about 1977.
Star Wars had already changed everything... Trek would have been seen as "old hat" by then. The revival might well have failed!
So by delaying two years and making it a big-buget MOVIE instead, Trek got much more attention and bang for its buck. Never mind that the movie was actually kind of boring. :lol
Then Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer took Star Trek off in a new direction (Gene was out of the picture)... which was cool as it turns out. But that freed up GR to "reinvent" Star Trek yet again, as the Next Generation TV series seven years later!
If Phase II had aired, maybe it wouldn't have lasted even a season: think about it, Phase II was essentially Season 4 of TOS. Star Trek had gone off the air in 1969. Saturday Night Live had even made fun of it already (1975). Now here it comes back again, in much the same form with the same actors, around about 1977.
Star Wars had already changed everything... Trek would have been seen as "old hat" by then. The revival might well have failed!
So by delaying two years and making it a big-buget MOVIE instead, Trek got much more attention and bang for its buck. Never mind that the movie was actually kind of boring. :lol
Then Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer took Star Trek off in a new direction (Gene was out of the picture)... which was cool as it turns out. But that freed up GR to "reinvent" Star Trek yet again, as the Next Generation TV series seven years later!
Last edited:
I think a lot of writers would have been attracted to the show and made it just as compelling as the original series.
Putting aside the bad films, I got only about six hours of Trek from the films with TOS crew. And lets face it the films were not so much about exploration and boldy going.
So for me six hours versus not getting far more from a series. Certainly many of which would have been far better then some of the films. Nimoy would have returned, come on, what else was he going to do to make money then?
Treks home is TV for me. What can I say.
But it's lost in time and an alternate dimension now.
Putting aside the bad films, I got only about six hours of Trek from the films with TOS crew. And lets face it the films were not so much about exploration and boldy going.
So for me six hours versus not getting far more from a series. Certainly many of which would have been far better then some of the films. Nimoy would have returned, come on, what else was he going to do to make money then?
Treks home is TV for me. What can I say.
But it's lost in time and an alternate dimension now.
Last edited:
Other than the exteriors of the ship as designed by Matt Jefferies, the Phase II plan I've heard was to do everything pretty much the same as the 1960s series. Very few of the sets would really have changed much. Heck, they were doing tests pretty much with leftover costumes from the original TV series!
I do agree about the scripts, though. It doesn't seem like they had ANYTHING in the burner that was worth shooting! What did make it onto TNG was nothing to write home about, either!
At best, Trek might have been like Galactica -- a good-looking show somewhat ahead of its time, but burdened by budget and script-writing problems.
TMP, for all its flaws, at least wasn't a cheap-looking film. The set designs sure have endured and the TMP Enterprise itself is still widely regarded as one of the best ship miniatures ever built for film and probably the iconic Enterprise design now.
Paramount sure got the maximum bang for its buck out of the TMP set pieces. A lot of them kept on getting used through the end of ST: Voyager. I don't think the engineering and hallway sets were broken down for THE FINAL TIME until after Voyager ended its run...
I do agree about the scripts, though. It doesn't seem like they had ANYTHING in the burner that was worth shooting! What did make it onto TNG was nothing to write home about, either!
At best, Trek might have been like Galactica -- a good-looking show somewhat ahead of its time, but burdened by budget and script-writing problems.
TMP, for all its flaws, at least wasn't a cheap-looking film. The set designs sure have endured and the TMP Enterprise itself is still widely regarded as one of the best ship miniatures ever built for film and probably the iconic Enterprise design now.
Paramount sure got the maximum bang for its buck out of the TMP set pieces. A lot of them kept on getting used through the end of ST: Voyager. I don't think the engineering and hallway sets were broken down for THE FINAL TIME until after Voyager ended its run...
feek61
Sr Member
That is not correct. The sets were to be completely different. The bridge was almost the same as what was eventually seen in TMP. The scripts were horrible though.
Will
SonofJorEl
Well-Known Member
Sure looks that way Phez. Hopefully it is the perspective, and hopefully the perspective is the problem on the wonky looking proportions of the Abrams Enterprise!
SonofJorEl
Well-Known Member
Sorry for minor hijack - I found this on the web. Someone put together a side view of the new ship--jeeez it's not pretty:
Last edited by a moderator:
Carson Dyle
Sr Member
It's also not accurate.
SonofJorEl
Well-Known Member
Thanks Carson!! Happy to hear it.
It's the distortion caused by the camera's wide angle lens. The saucer is symmetrical.
Look at how much the saucer "bulges out" toward the front.
Anyway we have Matt Jefferies' blueprint drawings plus other phto angles.. so yeah the saucer is symmetrical.
Look at how much the saucer "bulges out" toward the front.
Anyway we have Matt Jefferies' blueprint drawings plus other phto angles.. so yeah the saucer is symmetrical.
Is it just the perspective of this photo or is the bottom bump on the model not centered on the saucer?
Lancer
Sr Member
Now K you know that Bald is beautiful!
still an ugly woman......with the added bonus......that she couldn't act either.
BAK55
Well-Known Member
I once ranted that the original design had me compare it to an aircraft carrier. Simple in design and functional to do what it was meant to do.
The updated PhaseII/TMP design with it's sweptback, tapered pylons had me comparing it to a 1961 Cadillac. Sure, it's still functional and pretty, but when was the last time you saw an aircraft carrier looking stylish and flashy?
The updated PhaseII/TMP design with it's sweptback, tapered pylons had me comparing it to a 1961 Cadillac. Sure, it's still functional and pretty, but when was the last time you saw an aircraft carrier looking stylish and flashy?
Similar threads
