What were they thinking? AVENGERS style TREK

[The Mirrorball Man]

If they wish to branch out and expand the Trek franchise into multiples spinoffs, it's quite easy to do that without bringing back anyone.

[starburst]

I get what your saying but the logic behind your examples is wrong; Avengers was a new universe different to that of X-Men, Spiderman, Fantastic Four and Man of Steel is separate from the old films and while its potentially the basis for The Justice League its a different set of stories from the Nolan Batman.

The only one which is remaining consistent is the new Star Wars, the X-Men films diverged and now they are trying to force them back together but it doesnt fit (case point, when did Prof X loose the use of his legs?)

I think Paramount did the right thing wanting to start a fresh, I still enjoy the old Trek but some of it hasnt dated too well and it would be a headache to keep everything straight without becoming a problem.

"Come, come, Mr. Scott. Young minds, fresh ideas"

In other words, right call lets bring on Star Trek 2 and 3!

[Konata Izumi]

OP has the right idea except the 09 film is a great start to such a franchise. Shame not much happened since.

[anh165]

Comic hero book characters work in ensemble type movies because they are larger than life - you need commanding screen presence and the natural ability to have audiences side with them to carry a movie through to the end.

Star Trek has very few characters that have these qualities, and 99% of those few of them are in ST2009.

[Konata Izumi]

^They should have just replaced everyone with Patrick Stewart's Picard in Into Destruction.

[Franklin]

Even with new actors in the roles, it would be an utterly ridiculous mish-mash of characters that would cause fanboys in the theater to squeal in delite while everyone else did face-palms.

We had something like it with Kirk and Picard together in GEN, and instead of a truly special and memorable adventure scene using both of them, we had a lot of dialogue between Kirk and Picard in a cabin and on horseback (mostly exposition), a fistfight between Kirk and Soran, and Kirk falling off a bridge to his less than glorious death while Picard was powerless to help. Wow!

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The marvelous thing is that in no more than ten years they'll start fresh yet again, recasting Kirk, Spock and the gang.

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Xavier_Storma wrote:

---

Imagine how an AVENGERS-style TREK film could look like, teaming up original Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway and Archer!

When you say "Archer", if you mean Sterling Archer (as in my current avatar), then that would be awesome!

...and I mean "Totally" awesome:

[EyalM]

Xavier_Storma wrote:

---

Imagine how an AVENGERS-style TREK film could look like, teaming up original Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway and Archer!

You know, a team up only works when every member brings something unique and valuable to the table. What exactly does each of these characters bring that the others don't?

[Konata Izumi]

EyalM wrote:

---

You know, a team up only works when every member brings something unique and valuable to the table. What exactly does each of these characters bring that the others don't?

Different personalities.

Maybe movie 3 will be like the upcoming X-Men: Days of Future Past. A good moment to change the director too, as you'd expect a different aesthetic in the cross-over anyway.

[M'Sharak]

Robert Maxwell wrote:

---

I actually liked Generations, but Xavier_Storma's overselling it a wee bit. This is assuming he actually said that and you aren't putting words into his mouth/keyboard.

It appears to have been a direct quote.

Not sure this thread really belongs this forum, though. Seems almost as if it would have been a better fit in Future of Trek or Fan Fiction.

[Ketrick]

M'Sharak wrote:

---

Not sure this thread really belongs this forum, though. Seems almost as if it would have been a better fit in Future of Trek or Fan Fiction.

I'd say it fits more in Future of Trek.

To answer the OP, having all five captains or crews meet wouldn't work well. However, if you didn't try to shoehorn Archer and Kirk into the plot, a TNG/DS9/Voyager crossover movie might work if it was well written and well directed. Actually, an adaptation of Star Trek: Destiny would kinda fit the bill and could be as successful as the book series or moreso.

[Konata Izumi]

Konata Izumi wrote:

---

Maybe movie 3 will be like the upcoming X-Men: Days of Future Past. A good moment to change the director too, as you'd expect a different aesthetic in the cross-over anyway.

I just remembered someone said Bryan Singer likes Trek a lot.

They can continue the family theme as in the first movie they gathered together in the second they stay together in grave circumstances and then in the third they'd go their own ways or something and interact with Picard's crew while at it.

And then we continue with two Picard movies. As the current crew is just a re-hash anyway, so two and a half is plenty.

[The Mirrorball Man]

Ketrick wrote:

---

Actually, an adaptation of Star Trek: Destiny would kinda fit the bill and could be as successful as the book series or moreso.

i.e. not very successful.

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Xavier_Storma wrote:

---

You know... AVENGERS was also plain stupid, just like TRANSFORMERS, yet it did money and shaped the future of cinema franchises....

While I would agree that Avengers was NOT an intellectual art film that raised important social issues, I wouldn't call it stupid...

...Avengers was an escapist film that was a lot of fun to watch. It was extremely entertaining, even if it wasn't serious, or what some people would call intelligent. What I consider "good films" can have a wide variety of characteristics.

The characteristic that made Avengers a good film was that it was so fun to watch, and it certainly did not take itself too seriously. It was a smart film relative to the type of film it was trying to be.