What direction should the Star Trek movies go? (1 Viewer)

Paul Case · Jun 18, 2003

Weird...the thread is still listed but all the posts are gone. Quick, somebody scan for tachyon emissions! It could be a cloaking device of some kind.

Lou Sytsma · Jun 18, 2003

DB problem related no doubt.

Anyhow to recap - like Jeff Kleist mentioned earlier - dump the current production staff and start fresh.

I added to that that it might be a good change to start up a series of movies with a new cast instead of basing it on one of the TV shows.

After that I don't know what happened.

Paul Case · Jun 18, 2003

I still say Star Trek should just be put away for a decade or so to let it breathe a little. Give it a long enough break for it to become new again. Give it enough time where a new Trek feature will actually be an event instead of just another notch in a played out franchise. Most of all, let enough time pass for a brand new team of creative minds to approach the franchise without the baggage of all the CRAP that Berman has built up over the years. As long as Berman is associated with Trek, and as long as the shows he created are fresh in everybody's minds, Trek is better off dead.

Angelo.M · Jun 18, 2003

I'm not a ST:TNG fan. Actually, I haven't liked ST since the original television series.

That said, I rented Nemesis just to see where things stood nowadays. Yikes.

I can see why it flopped. The film had absolutely nothing interesting to say, and when it veered into "that's an interesting idea" territory, it quickly changed its tune. Felt like something I've seen on television, but not as good. Let this franchise rest.

JohnAP · Jun 18, 2003

Definitely they should take some time off and I think they will. TNG only seemed to do one really good film, though the others have their merits. Perhaps in a few years, Enterprise will be ready to take it to the screen. Otherwise, I don't see anywhere for the current films to go.

Stephen_Dar · Jun 18, 2003

As a big fan of the original show, I see the trek universe in fairly simple colors. TOS was about exploration of the universe and our own future, and in that simple idea there was infinite possibility. Everything since then has been about milking, aping, mimicking, and otherwise trying to capture some aspect of the original without actually buying into the exploration idea. Presumably this is because exploration is too intellectual in the opinion of Hollywood power brokers. Instead you get soaps in space. I haven't hated everything that came since, and some of it has been quite worthwhile (the best TNG episodes in particular; certainly none of the movies, IMHO), but I think the above applies in all cases.

Thus, my prescription is that the current "creative team" should leave the franchise, and probably a lot of time should pass. So far I have found that 21st century film making is dominated by really childish tripe, and in that environment I see no way for Trek to be worthwhile.

Norm · Jun 18, 2003

Instead you get soaps in space.

I totally agree, I felt that way during the first season in 87, where was the exploration like in TOS? Infact I only lasted one season as a diehard, then caught a few here and there over the years. They spent way to much time on the Enterprise in TNG it seemed like Federation Space Patrol around & around we go. I did read years ago that woman viewership went up with TNG.

Click to expand...

Jeffrey Gray · Jun 18, 2003

I say let it rest. I'm now completely sick of Star Trek, and dunno why it's been run so far into the ground...but it needs to stop.

Norm · Jun 18, 2003

I just rented all 7 seasons of TNG, just to see if my opinion had change, and it hasn't, infact I think I like the first season the best because Roddenberry had more pull then. I am now renting Season 1 of DS9, since I missed most of those and I'm getting the same Soap feeling again. I only lasted two seasons on Voyager. Enterprise I like more since I restarted watching it near the end of last season, I am currently catching up on most of Season 1 and there are some lame episodes there. But I'm intrigued enough to watch Season 3. The movies are getting worse as they go on , I agree that Berman & Co. are burnt out, why can't Paramount see this and hire a new team to at least to handle the Movie franchise.

Steve Phillips · Jun 18, 2003

PLEASE give it a lengthy (7-10 year) rest.

Will_B · Jun 18, 2003

Something new would be nice.

There's never been a Trek film set entirely in the future San Francisco, the home of Starfleet and a place where our hero, a captain who has returned from a space mission, could find himself a Fugitive in some kind of Blade Runner like plot, with flashbacks to something that may have happened in space which may or may not have made him into an enemy agent for a hostile species. Can he trust himself? Can he trust his former crew (who are also on shore leave)?

Plenty of room for San Francisco type car chases, too, except it would be an homage to all those steep-hill car chases of the seventies, not a juvenile attempt to actually embrace such stuff. Lots of night time action - we get to see the whole of San Francisco - Starfleet headquarters, the waterfront, the clubs, Coit Tower... maybe there's something underwater off the shore of San Francisco...

The hero could be any young starfleet officer. NO NEED to cast any of the current Trek actors or alums, though plenty of room for cameos if available. Dr. Bashir, for example, might be the guy's doctor who he visits for a checkup.

That's my first idea. My second idea...

Will_B · Jun 18, 2003

My second idea is, admittedly, a variation on Star Trek IV:

Star Trek has never "done" the grey aliens seen in real life alien encounters. So a story involving grey aliens time traveling into different Star Trek eras (TOS and Next Gen and Enterprise eras) for mysterious reasons would be nice.

Several members of different casts - Admiral Picard, Bakula's Captain Archer, T'Pol, Trip, generic TOS era people - would be in it, depending on which actors want to be in it.

The mysterious reason why all the grey critters suddenly flowed into earth's history would be something to do with the environment (a la Trek IV, except not about whales). For most of the film they appear to be bad guys, but then there's a twist, and the real enemy and real danger would emerge.

Not only does this allow different crews to be in the film, but it explains why this type of alien have been entirely absent from the Trek universe (with the exception of Riker's little buddy from that one episode where the "boy" turned out to be an alien). The reason being, the film would show they just suddently emerged in all parts of Earth's history at the start of the film.

Scott D S · Jun 18, 2003

There's never been a Trek film set entirely in the future San Francisco, the home of Starfleet and a place where our hero, a captain who has returned from a space mission, could find himself a Fugitive in some kind of Blade Runner like plot, with flashbacks to something that may have happened in space which may or may not have made him into an enemy agent for a hostile species. Can he trust himself? Can he trust his former crew (who are also on shore leave)?

I actually had a similar idea. It would be like a film (future) noir with detectives and flashbacks and deep shadows and femme fatales and political intrigue on a galactic scale. Two things I would love to see in a future Star Trek film: Section 31 and a dogfight in the Fleet Museum. Imagine panning by a replica of the original Enterprise on the big screen during a space battle.

Just the fanboy in me thinking out loud.

Click to expand...

Yee-Ming · Jun 18, 2003

There's never been a Trek film set entirely in the future San Francisco

Sounds very interesting. Also sounds very bold. And precisely for that reason, the studio isn't going to go for it. The risk of alienating the broader fan-base, which probably wants to see space battles, is rather high, whilst such a premise isn't going to bring non-fans in either.

Click to expand...

Will_B · Jun 18, 2003

Ah but the premise WOULD bring in non-trek-fans, because it has all the noir and action that you'd expect from a film set in the city made famous by Alfred Hitchcock.

Trek films have to be good enough to compete with other "real" films, and that means making a film that could work either inside or outside of the trek universe.

A thriller, but with tricorders.

Will_B · Jun 18, 2003

and femme fatales

Certainly should be one. Make her an alien. Done.

Only problem there is there's a certain minority in the Trek fan base (not that it matters) which freaks out whenever women display sexuality. So the studio might need to temper it by making her a Vulcan.

Click to expand...

Dan Rudolph · Jun 18, 2003

They went and killed off the Duras sisters. SO i say bring in sexy Romulan replacements.

Yee-Ming · Jun 18, 2003

Ah but the premise WOULD bring in non-trek-fans, because it has all the noir and action that you'd expect from a film set in the city made famous by Alfred Hitchcock.

With respect, Im not sure it would. No matter how good a Trek movie might be on a stand-alone basis, casual viewers would inevitably have the "ewww, it's Star Trek" type attitude, giving it an automatic strike against even before they considered it on its merits.

Click to expand...

Jeff · Jun 18, 2003

The key to a successful Star Trek movie is to write a good sci-fi story that would work with any characters, not just the Star Trek characters & universe. Then you can start integrating the Trek characters into the story. Also, Trek needs a more epic feel. None of this wrapping up a TV style story line in less than 2 hours and more like a trilogy sort of like they did with 2, 3 and 4 but more on the lines of one story.

Jeff

Pete-D · Jun 19, 2003

I don't think Trek is all that played out. It's still watchable and even sometimes insightful, which is probably more than can be said for that "other" space franchise right now.

It's just Trek was so popular since its resurgance in the late 80s and really garnered a new and younger fanbase in the early-mid 1990s that it was bound to hit a slow curve where creative malaise set in.

I enjoyed The Next Generation and TOS on television immensely, and could even go along with Deep Space 9, but Voyager is where I draw the line.

I think the Star Trek movies need to be more MOVIE than a souped-up episode. Get some dramatic movie scores in there. Get some higher-stakes storylines. Get some better locations/cinematography that wouldn't be possible on the TV series.

Star Trek II and Star Trek VI, which both had involvement by Nicolas Meyer did this IMO. The most "epic" of the TNG movies (First Contact) also did well with audiences.

Of course they need to get some fresh blood in there, but I think getting people who don't know crap about ST would be a mistake also. They did that with Nemesis in hiring a director that didn't know anything about Trek.

The thing with Trek is yes it is primarily about exploration, but its a sci-fi series that can encompass many different genres and styles, from almost flat-out action (First Contact) to murder mystery (Star Trek VI) to modern-day adventure/romance (Star Trek IV).

To me, that's a strength of Star Trek that it can encompass so many different styles and still pull it off. The problem is these new movies (especailly the last two) simply are bloated TV episodes, and not particularily good ones either.

I think giving it a few years rest will probably increase the apetetite for movie audiences for Star Trek, but right now in the midst of the Matrix, Lord of the Rings, etc. era,
Trek is simply the odd-man out.

Home Theater

Entertainment & Streaming Content

Physical Media

Home Theater Equipment and Hardware

Other Diversions

Bargains and Classifieds

Home Theater Forum

Archives

What direction should the Star Trek movies go? (1 Viewer)

Supporting Actor

Supporting Actor

Second Unit

Stunt Coordinator

Second Unit

Screenwriter

Supporting Actor

Supporting Actor

Screenwriter

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more

Similar Threads

Forum statistics