Star Trek 4 Reportedly Shelved

I think that's a good question. I mean the TOS movies filled a void, as did the Kelvinverse films, but looking back, the TNG films (which were a mixed bag) might have added to a sense of Trek fatigue that didn't help DS9, VOY, and especially ENT. That being said, since the TNG crew is my favorite overall I certainly wanted to see them on the big screen and First Contact is in my top three of Trek films still. I also liked Generations a lot, was lukewarm about INS, and have mostly gotten over my disappointment with NEM.

But now that Trek is back on the small screen I don't see a need to continue doing movies right now. I wish there was a groundswell of support that would convince Paramount to put out a DS9, ENT, or even VOY film but I don't see that. I'm fine with Trek growing on the small screen. I hope that the Picard show leads to other shows. It would be great to catch up with the crews from all the series. And I wonder if George Takei would be up for a Captain, or Admiral, Sulu series or telefilm that could perhaps reunite some of the other TOS veterans.

 

Honestly, I think Beyond was doomed the minute that godawful reveal trailer was released. At least, it would have required some very impressive marketing to get out of the shadow of that trailer, and it never got it.

Note to future Trek film producers: some action is always welcome (though a few purists may argue differently), but it's not the main reason why we go to see these films.

 

More Trek is always what I want if that is possible. Films or TV, both are acceptable to me.

 

BEY was ruined for me by the online trailer that revealed that Krall and Edison were the same character.

Kor

 

John Campea and Robert Meyer Burnett comment on the news of ST4 being dead.



Good points. Star Trek shouldn't have been a 200M blockbuster franchise.

 

Remaking material that's already been done is what doomed this Kelvin franchise creatively, and turned off the fanbase.

 

Remaking material has been going on ever since TNG came along.

 

When you reboot a franchise, like Trek did in 2009, and make a promise for brand new material going forward.... going back to what's already been done undermines the whole thing.

That's a big reason why STiD and Khan soured the Kelvin franchise, eventually leading to it's demise.

 

I guess this means TarantinoTrek might be dead too unless Tarantino retools his script. Everyone seems to forget that both Quinto and Urban indicated it was being developed as Star Trek 5.

 

There hasn't been a good Star Wars movie since Jedi and they're still making billions, though with how bad TLJ and the backlash against it (Solo) then Episode 9 might not do so well.

 

Star Trek should be a 200M franchise, has been one and still can be.

 

I think Trek is better off on television. Before the Kelvin films, they were essentially glorified reunion specials where we got to check in with old beloved characters every once in awhile. The Kelvin films in that context are an anomaly. It was an interesting thing to see happen, but it’s roots will always be on television and that’s not a bad thing. There’s plenty of benefits television offers that a feature film can’t deliver on. Neither of the films ever reached the kind of status that Paramount wanted in matching with other large 200m franchises. They really tried to push it into that stratosphere, but I don’t think it was meant to be.

 

I get the Star Trek is "better on TV" argument but I've always found it myopic thinking. YMMV.

 

I feel like the biggest hurdle that these NuTrek films had was it's dependency of JJ Abrams being heavily involved. Even though he initially only wanted to do one movie, everyone involved with making these movies felt that they could not be made without him. They put off the sequel to Trek09 so JJ could do a different project. They really didn't want anyone else to direct the sequel even though they had all of this momentum going after the release of Trek09! As Star Trek Beyond showed, there are directors who would gladly take a shot at directing a Star Trek movie, but everyone kept thinking that the only success this series will ever get is if JJ directs it. It's just a pity for fans of NuTrek that they had to sit on the sequels for so long. We could have had four or five movies at this point if they went with a different direction than Into Darkness.

 

Same here. I am one who thinks the more Trek that is out there, films and TV, the better.

 

I didn't like the Abramsverse films, but I don't feel like celebrating its downfall, I'm just numb. I guess it was inevitable given how popular some of its actors (Chris Pine, Zoe Saldana, Zachary Quinto) have become since Star Trek (2009). The Tarantino-Trek idea was intriguing, but its just not his style (the sci-fi space opera thing). It was short-lived, but its influence will live on through Star Trek: Discovery due to Alex Kurtzman's involvement in the franchise.

 

Agreed. You don’t see Marvel putting one of their films on hold because a director wants to go off and do a pet project (though in the case of GOTG3 that’s a much more contentious situation).You look for the next hungry director to continue that legacy.

 

I would not be surprised if the Discovery universe evolves into big screen outings. Also Paramount has to take responsibilty for how it marketed the Kelvinverse sequels. They went out of their way to say someone was definitely not playing THAT character into Into Darkness and then it turned out they were that character all along. Into Darkness should have been released by 2012 at the absolute latest - four years is far too long a gap for franchise sequels - unless it is something extraordinary - it really wasn't. They needed to strike while the iron was hot from the 2009 movie. The marketing for Beyond was shambolic to say the least as well.

 

This is exactly what I was hoping for.

 

A reboot just resets the pieces. It doesn't throw them away.