Why isn't Star Trek a big movie franchise?

[Captain of the USS Averof]

I'm just saying it's not all merchandised for "adult collectors" regardless of who else buys them. If it's McFarlane, the I get it. But this isn't an "adult collector" toy company, nor it is merchandised in a collector way. It's in the toy aisle with the Nerf guns.

OK, I think I understand what you mean now. To be honest I didn't know about the Nerf guns. You have a point there. A kid might buy and play with a Nerf blaster without having seen TWD, (or even knowing what it is). But if we want Star Trek to grow we need a new audience and a new animated show in the style of Star Wars Rebels will help greatly. Plus, kids want to buy the toys from the stuff they see on TV so that's one (of the many) reasons Star Wars LEGO sell a lot better than the Star Trek KRE-O.

 

[TRON JA307020]

... Star Trek was never meant to only exist on the big screen. Star Trek was a tv show which would have the ocassional movie BASED on the show. That is why the current movies are so dumbed down and soulless.

This is weak.

Please try harder.

Actually Star Trek was meant for the small screen which is why the movies are hit and miss. Roddenberry designed the show to have a mix of drama, characterization, morality story lines and social commentary and the action and special effects was thrown into the mix but were always secondary to the actual story. The original movies to an extent took some of what made the show great out of the mix but managed to keep a fair amount in. The NuTrek movies have upped the action and really shrunk the characterization and drama and social commentary to nearly nothing. Star Trek isn't like bigger franchises such as Star Wars were it was specifically designed for the large screen. Star Wars has one large evil empire that controls the entire Galaxy. You always know the villain going into a Star Wars movie. Basically Star Wars is a war story so in turn there is plenty of action and it is somewhat balance with the scenes we get with the Jedi and the Force. Star Trek on the other hand needs to find a new villain or threat for each movie and that's a mixed bag because the strength of the villain for each movie can make or break it. I have to say with Beyond the villain for me wasn't very memorable. I don't even remember his name. If the NuTrek movies want to become a bigger franchise they need to try something different by maybe focus on the exploring and bring a larger arc to the storytelling for all the movies to follow.

 

[I am not Spock]

even Doctor Who gets to be part of this 'geek chic' culture, and it used to , arguably, be even 'nerdier' than Trek

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

even Doctor Who gets to be part of this 'geek chic' culture, and it used to , arguably, be even 'nerdier' than Trek

I don't expect a 190 million dollar Doctor Who movie coming out to cinemas soon.

 

[Phily B]

Trek has been mismanaged for a very long time, the rights are all over the place, the TV rights are all over the place and split from the movies, the video game license is non-existent bar STO to the point where just getting out old click and point games is a huge deal. It'll always be popular, but it will never be like Star Wars which basically relies entirely on nostalgia these days.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I don't expect a 190 million dollar Doctor Who movie coming out to cinemas soon.

Neither do I. Mainly because Doctor Who would be able to pull off a pretty epic cinema treatment for around $80 million and still out-gross Star Trek Beyond by the third week.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

It'll always be popular, but it will never be like Star Wars which basically relies entirely on nostalgia these days.

I feel like you have that backwards: Star Trek seems to rely entirely on nostalgia since none of the NEW material has any meaningful marketing at all and almost all of the merchandise, multimedia, novels, games and toys are all tied up in shows that were canceled more than a decade ago. Star Wars, on the other hand, has made the jump from "nostalgia" to "constantly expanding universe," and they did that first by heavily promoting the prequels, then heavily promoting the prequel-related media ("Clone Wars" era products and games) and then by jumping forward with both the new trilogy and Rebels-era material. They're still churning out and promoting NEW stuff in and around the old continuity's timeline.

I do an amazon search for "Star Trek Models" and this is what I see: 4 or 5 kits and toys for the Enterprise-A or -B, at least 6 for the TOS Enterprise. Only ONE kit for the Kelvinverse Enterprise, and it's the one that came out in 2012.
But then I do a search for "Star Wars Models" and I see that almost half the results are kits and toys from the last two Star Wars movies: the VERY FIRST PAGE is Poe's X-wing fighter from "Force Awakens" which was available for sale four months before the movie even released. They have a kit for the tie fighter, for the First Order troopship, for the cargo walkers on Scarif, they have a kit for Kylo Ren's fucking bicycle.

And after 7 years, Star Trek doesn't even have a shuttlecraft kit. You search "Star Trek shuttlecraft" and the first result is a ship that made its debut in 1967 and hasn't been in the big screen EVER.

No, it's definitely not a nostalgia market in Star Wars. THAT's going on with the franchise whose fanbase instinctively shitcans all the new material and only reliably consumes products at least 15 years old. If the intention was to transcend the nostalgia market and appeal to a new generation of fans, Star Trek has made NO serious attempt to do that outside of the films themselves.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Neither do I. Mainly because Doctor Who would be able to pull off a pretty epic cinema treatment for around $80 million and still out-gross Star Trek Beyond by the third week.

Yeah right. That's why in the 53 years of Doctor Who they only have produced 1 TV movie (and 2 unofficial Dalek films from 50 years ago). Because they probably don't need all that box office money.

They're still churning out and promoting NEW stuff in and around the old continuity's timeline.

The NEW stuff of Star Wars is of course a virtual remake of Episode IV and a direct prequel of Episode IV. No, no nostalgia here at all.

 

[Phily B]

I feel like you have that backwards: Star Trek seems to rely entirely on nostalgia since none of the NEW material has any meaningful marketing at all and almost all of the merchandise, multimedia, novels, games and toys are all tied up in shows that were canceled more than a decade ago. Star Wars, on the other hand, has made the jump from "nostalgia" to "constantly expanding universe," and they did that first by heavily promoting the prequels, then heavily promoting the prequel-related media ("Clone Wars" era products and games) and then by jumping forward with both the new trilogy and Rebels-era material. They're still churning out and promoting NEW stuff in and around the old continuity's timeline.

I do an amazon search for "Star Trek Models" and this is what I see: 4 or 5 kits and toys for the Enterprise-A or -B, at least 6 for the TOS Enterprise. Only ONE kit for the Kelvinverse Enterprise, and it's the one that came out in 2012.
But then I do a search for "Star Wars Models" and I see that almost half the results are kits and toys from the last two Star Wars movies: the VERY FIRST PAGE is Poe's X-wing fighter from "Force Awakens" which was available for sale four months before the movie even released. They have a kit for the tie fighter, for the First Order troopship, for the cargo walkers on Scarif, they have a kit for Kylo Ren's fucking bicycle.

And after 7 years, Star Trek doesn't even have a shuttlecraft kit. You search "Star Trek shuttlecraft" and the first result is a ship that made its debut in 1967 and hasn't been in the big screen EVER.

No, it's definitely not a nostalgia market in Star Wars. THAT's going on with the franchise whose fanbase instinctively shitcans all the new material and only reliably consumes products at least 15 years old. If the intention was to transcend the nostalgia market and appeal to a new generation of fans, Star Trek has made NO serious attempt to do that outside of the films themselves.

Talking more about the movies and the marketing. They put Darth Vader in both those movies, at least his mask, just for marketing because people say "WOW I REMEMBER THAT!" and its a big thing at the moment. Apart from STID's silliness and over the top referencing, Beyond was a brilliant new story that did not rely on any nostalgia, old villains, ships, races etc etc. The new Star Wars stuff, I am completely not a fan of, over commercialised, movies by Disney studio executives. As cool as it'd be to see Trek that popular, it would quickly take away from Trek itself.

That said, it's pretty sad that you can get a Bib Fortuna or Whazzajack Jizzman toy way easier than a Sisko or Janeway toy.

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah right. That's why in the 53 years of Doctor Who they only have produced 1 TV movie (and 2 unofficial Dalek films from 50 years ago). Because they probably don't need all that box office money.



The NEW stuff of Star Wars is of course a virtual remake of Episode IV and a direct prequel of Episode IV. No, no nostalgia here at all.

It's a good mix of both nostalgia and new.

Talking more about the movies and the marketing. They put Darth Vader in both those movies, at least his mask, just for marketing because people say "WOW I REMEMBER THAT!" and its a big thing at the moment. Apart from STID's silliness and over the top referencing, Beyond was a brilliant new story that did not rely on any nostalgia, old villains, ships, races etc etc. The new Star Wars stuff, I am completely not a fan of, over commercialised, movies by Disney studio executives. As cool as it'd be to see Trek that popular, it would quickly take away from Trek itself.

That said, it's pretty sad that you can get a Bib Fortuna or Whazzajack Jizzman toy way easier than a Sisko or Janeway toy.

I agree that it is sad that Star Trek toys are nigh impossible to find, or just hoping to come across old stuff.

What's interesting about Beyond is, despite the new villain and story, much of the compliments that came from it was how much it "felt" like a TOS episode. The relationships and interactions were all crafted in a way that emphasize prior interactions such as Spock and Bones' banter. Obviously there was a lot of new stuff there too, and Jaylah was especially well done, in my opinion.

But, I've also seen the argument made that Beyond ignored much of the relationships that were made in the first two films for the sake of nostalgia. Spock and Uhura's romance is one such example and that felt frustrating to me that there was the need to break them up with little interaction between the two.

As for Star Wars, I think it's a good mix. I love TFA, not for Han Solo (though he has his moments) but for the new characters and settings. Rey, Finn, Poe and Kylo are all interesting and dynamic characters who will probably carry the next film even more, with less nostalgia. I haven't seen Rogue One yet, but one brief shot of Darth Vader doesn't make me want to go see it. They even marketed more heavily on the Death Troopers than anything else.

tl:dr Star Wars is trying new stuff with nostalgic flavoring. Star Trek is still relying on nostalgia.

 

[Ralphis]

The general audience just views Star Trek as being kitsch, while Star Wars and superheros are cool. I'm not sure that'll ever change at this point. Part of me kind of wishes Paramount would scale the Star Trek productions back to something close to the $50-$60 million range. That way you can still make a good looking movie, but not have to water things down either.

 

[Galileo7]

The general audience just views Star Trek as being kitsch, while Star Wars and superheros are cool. I'm not sure that'll ever change at this point. Part of me kind of wishes Paramount would scale the Star Trek productions back to something close to the $50-$60 million range. That way you can still make a good looking movie, but not have to water things down either.

Yes, the WOK $10M budget and production with an interesting story after TMP $40M budget. Although, I still believe that there is a Star Trek story that would attract a large general audience. With all the existing ST series and novels there have to be stories that can be adapted into the J.J. Trek setting with the existing cast. Beside the Star Wars and DC/Marvel films there are other science-fiction films[ Avatar(2009) ] that do well above Star Trek at the box office, so...

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Beyond was a brilliant new story that did not rely on any nostalgia, old villains, ships, races etc etc.

Aside from the fact that the entire premise of the movie turned out to be a direct reference to Enterprise Season 3, there's the fact that the reboot movies themselves are basically an attempt to update and modernize a TV show that hasn't been on the air in 50 years. There's an INHERENT nostalgia element that comes with modernizing an old product, which is why hollywood likes remakes so much.

Rogue One and Force Awakens both injected original characters into situations and locations already inhabited by longstanding ones who are likely to still show up again in future products (with Rebels still in the air and Tarkin having already made more than one appearance on the same). That's not nostalgia so much as "world building."

That said, it's pretty sad that you can get a Bib Fortuna or Whazzajack Jizzman toy way easier than a Sisko or Janeway toy.

If you can't commercialize a commercial product, what the hell is the point? Take away its artistic integrity and its supposed "vision for the future" and Star Trek is just another franchise intended to make money. So why aren't they using it to, you know, make money?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Yeah right. That's why in the 53 years of Doctor Who they only have produced 1 TV movie (and 2 unofficial Dalek films from 50 years ago). Because they probably don't need all that box office money.

True. Not saying they would, but they COULD. Doctor Who has a long tradition of being able to produce some pretty amazing stories on a relatively stingy budget.

The NEW stuff of Star Wars is of course a virtual remake of Episode IV and a direct prequel of Episode IV. No, no nostalgia here at all.

The "special edition" updates were nostalgic. Continuity nods are something else.

Otherwise, the only answer to that comment would be the name "James T. Kirk."

tl:dr Star Wars is trying new stuff with nostalgic flavoring. Star Trek is still relying on nostalgia.

Agreed.

 

[Paradise City]

There's no intrinsic reason why Trek can't be a grand and sustainable movie franchise. You "arc" it up, have movie goers pining for more in a cliffhanger style and you ensure you depict events that transcend what one might find in the episodes.

Star Wars TFA wasn't original or particularly "new". Creatively, it was a very conservative movie. They did what they did before, depicted wrenching inter-family conflicts in a way that shocked. That's an old template. And it was the catalyst that made the movie fly. It was a fine movie.

 

[I am not Spock]

Star Trek is trading on nostalgia, and Star Wars is original? Say wha?

TFA was a total beat for beat remake of A New Hope. Rogue One was total fan service, cameos, callbacks to ANH, etc

 

[fireproof78]

Star Trek is trading on nostalgia, and Star Wars is original? Say wha?

TFA was a total beat for beat remake of A New Hope. Rogue One was total fan service, cameos, callbacks to ANH, etc

It's the characters that give that world life, and make it breathe. As @Crazy Eddie said, it isn't just nostalgia in RO or Rebels but also worldbuilding, showcasing new characters in a prexisting world.

I'm not saying Star wars is entirely original, because it never was. I'm saying it's working within new and old elements that feel very real, vibrant and alive. As much as I love Kelvin universe characters and their relationships, Beyond took a step back in to nostalgia with the character dynamics. Jaylah and Kirk being the most dynamic of the cast, in my opinion. Kirk's arc continued, but the rest got sidelined for familiar relationships of TOS.

 

[Paradise City]

Star Wars TFA was the Star Wars format reused in a far, far more obvious way than Trek falls back on TWOK. Way more so.

Stars Wars seem to make the decision just to consciously use the Stars Wars template whereas when Trek falls back on doing TWOK redux, they kinda lie to themselves and pretend that it's something original.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Star Trek is trading on nostalgia, and Star Wars is original? Say wha?

The main characters in Rogue One were ALL original characters. So were most of the leads in "Force Awakens." Legacy characters from previous films were present either in cameos, in a support role, or having ACTUALLY AGED and displaying quite a bit of nostalgia themselves.

You might as well call Undiscovered Country "nostalgic" because it includes the same characters as TOS.

TFA was a total beat for beat remake of A New Hope.

Really? A New Hope started with a gun battle on a desert planet that saw the capture of a Rebel pilot who later handed a map to Obi Won Kenobi to a droid immediately before being captured, only to be helped to escape by a rogue storm trooper who turns into a completely-over-his-head wannabe hero that witlessly helps another protagonist, steal a spacecraft from a junk yard that turns out to be the ride of one of her biggest heroes?

Or by "beat for beat" do you mean "broad brush similarities that vaguely remind me of a completely different movie?"

Rogue One was total fan service, cameos, callbacks to ANH, etc

Yes, because Rogue one was a prequel and side story to a New Hope. That's exactly what it was SUPPOSED to be. And if they came up with a movie that delved in great detail into the lives of a handful of imperial pilots stationed on the death star when it exploded, their personal struggle and experiences, their battles with PTSD and the loss of their friends, that would also be a side story and tie-in material rife with fanservice and world building.

"Nostalgia," on the other hand, is when your entire fan base goes to see a Star Trek movie and then leaves the theater angry because the movie they saw IS NOT similar enough to a 1967 prime time television show they used to watch when they were kids.

Listening to Simon and Garfunkle is nostalgia. Listening to Disturbed doing a "Hello Darkness" cover, not so much.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Stars Wars seem to make the decision just to consciously use the Stars Wars template whereas when Trek falls back on doing TWOK redux, they kinda lie to themselves and pretend that it's something original.

It's not really a "lie" when the similarities don't extend past the broadest summation of the story outline. If you were really paying attention, for example, you'd notice that STID didn't have anything CLOSE to the same plot as TWOK, and was less similar to that film in structure than, say, TUC or Nemesis. STID is only compared to Wrath of Khan because it has the same villain, but otherwise they have nothing else in common whatsoever.

Here's the thing you don't seem to be getting: Star Trek is most heavily marketing its legacy products from the 1960s, 70s and 80s. Deep Space Nine is HUGELY under-represented in Star Trek materials, and Voyager is hugely over-represented. In other words, instead of throwing their weight behind the new production and saying "This is the direction we're going now, this is what Star Trek looks like," we're still getting the message of "If you liked the new Star Trek movie, you're going to LOVE the classic TV series from 1967!"

Rogue One re-did the troop walkers from "Empire Strikes Back" to create a new version for Rogue One; that new version is in toy stores all over America right now. STB, on the other hand, designed a brand new starbase, redesigned the Enterprise, then BLEW UP the Enterprise and built ANOTHER one:
No toys. Of the Enterprise. No toys of the Enterprise-A. No models of either. No models of Yorktown. No beauty shots of any of these, no high-res images for publicity. We're not even totally sure what the fucking things LOOK LIKE, all we have to go on are screencaps. In fact, to my knowledge not a SINGLE starship from any of the Kelvinverse movies has made it into any of the Ships of the Line calendars in the last seven years. The TOS Enterprise and ships like it had a half dozen entries the same year STID came out.

I just finished wrapping a Nerf Storm Trooper blaster for my son's christmas presents. When has there EVER been a Star Trek themed nerf gun? They haven't released a new hand phaser toy since 2009. You can buy the nerf gun version of an assault rifle from Halo but nobody sells the phaser rifle from STID.

You can accuse Star Wars of going the "nostalgia" route all you like, but every time they come out with something NEW, it floods the market and sells like crazy. New characters, new ships, new stories. Star Trek comes out with something new, it'll be seven and a half years before anyone but its most loyal fans even know about it.