• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Variety about the future of Star Trek

The one thing I do disagree with is that Trek "weaponizes" nostalgia. They don't, or at least not in as cynical a way as some other franchises do (looking at you, Star Wars).
Star Wars is doing great and I don't think it weaponizes nostalgia, or at least not like Star Trek does. Star Trek drops in it at random, with little story purpose, like all the different tribbles. My kids actually want to watch it, vs. most of Star Trek. They get bored of it quite easily.
 
The Kelvin movies should never have stopped. They also should not have been expected to be billion dollar tentpoles (though this is a symptom in the movie industry at large). They should have kept on going and then branched into streaming TV.

Star Trek Into Darkness and Star Trek Beyond lost money.

Star Wars is doing great

The last two Star Wars movies, Solo: A Star Wars Story and The Rise of Skywalker, lost money.
 
Cause and effect are confused.

Trek relies upon nostalgia because its core audience has always been older. The TOS-based movies were nostalgia fests because in the 1980s people who would reliably plunk down four to six bucks for a ticket had been watching the thing for ten or twenty years and the once-very-couple-of-years schedule was Old Home Week. It was built around a cadre of actors entering later middle age who were not stars outside of being featured in these movies, and neither the producers nor the studio had any confidence that it could be done successfully without those actors.

As to why such a franchise shouldn't become more successful with younger folks? Give me one good reason that it should. It's barely a mass phenomenon at all by the standards of other modern properties. The premise that it can somehow transcend half a century of being an also-ran at the box office and in terms of TV ratings is hard to justify.

But fans never really change. Right now you have a lot of people who've convinced each other that the way forward is to springboard off of a miniseries built around seniors and middle-aged performers that was successful almost entirely on the basis of....wait for it...nostalgia.
 
Last edited:
Constructing an entire season around the premise of "Only the Enterprise A … ish, the ship from the one with the whales, and the perfectly recreated Enterprise D can save us from the mega big bad mash-up doomsday whatever of the two prime baddies of a bygone era" is literally weaponizing nostalgia.

Or like how the entire thematic reprise of the SNW season 1 finale hinges entirely on having prior knowledge of the classic episode it's riffing.

IAudiences respond to nostalgia, so they make it. It's simple market economics..
Which audience? The very loyal few and not not very young one? You seem to have unintentionally hit the nail on the head.
 
Again, I would like to think it can. It hasn't down it though.

I really need to get to a Star Trek convention before everyone dies. But they’re so much more expensive than Doctor Who ones. I did see a couple of panels at Phoenix Fan Fest for B5 and TNG anniversaries. But the last Trek convention I went to was one in Chicago in the 90s. Creation cons tend to be pricey even back then. Maybe it’s the cost. I don’t understand why Trek cons are substantially more expensive than Doctor Who ones.
 
I don’t understand why Trek cons are substantially more expensive than Doctor Who ones.
As I understand it, part of the reason is that Creation likes to squeeze as much $$$ as they can out of fans. Even their cons for other shows are ridiculous.

I'm glad you got to come to my little con for the B5 and TNG reunions. Those were so awesome.
 
The premise that it can somehow transcend half a century of being an also-ran at the box office and in terms of TV ratings is hard to justify.

I don't know? Just the other day someone told me Discovery was one of the most popular TV series in the world! :eek:
 
While I haven't witnessed it personally, I've seen photos from various conventions post-Discovery showing people cosplaying in the new uniforms and such. Now, no idea if they're new Trek fans or Old, but the representation is there at least.

Plus very long lines for the new actors.
 
Which audience? The very loyal few and not not very young one? You seem to have unintentionally hit the nail on the head.

This question is irrelevant. If Paramount discovers, through metrics that are either transparent or opaque, that nostalgia will give Trek AN audience they will do it. The composition of it is either secondary or a non-concern. Like any corporation, the goal is line go up in the immediate term. Whatever gets that done is what they will do.
 
Star Wars is doing great and I don't think it weaponizes nostalgia, or at least not like Star Trek does. Star Trek drops in it at random, with little story purpose, like all the different tribbles. My kids actually want to watch it, vs. most of Star Trek. They get bored of it quite easily.

So this is probably a matter of opinion but, 2 things:

1. the nostalgia in the sequel trilogy was orders of magnitude more ham fisted and inorganic than anything in PIC S3. The Palpatine stuff alone is the poster child for nostalgia gone wrong and totally derailed the direction of the sequel trilogy.

2. Star Wars, like Dr Who, was and primarily still is a property aimed at children (no matter what the toxic fanboys say) so this isn’t entirely surprising.
 
Star Trek Into Darkness and Star Trek Beyond lost money.

I may be wrong but I could swear that there was some of that famous specious Hollywood accounting used to reach this conclusion. Also, it kind of proves my point anyway because trek shouldn’t have the budget of not be expected to make the profit of a a major blockbuster. It has never been that.
 
So this is probably a matter of opinion but, 2 things:

1. the nostalgia in the sequel trilogy was orders of magnitude more ham fisted and inorganic than anything in PIC S3. The Palpatine stuff alone is the poster child for nostalgia gone wrong and totally derailed the direction of the sequel trilogy.

2. Star Wars, like Dr Who, was and primarily still is a property aimed at children (no matter what the toxic fanboys say) so this isn’t entirely surprising.
Strong disagree on one. Wife and I did a full rewatch of most SW films and shows leading up to Episode 9 and Palpatine's return seemed inevitable. He was just too powerful.
 
Strong disagree on one. Wife and I did a full rewatch of most SW films and shows leading up to Episode 9 and Palpatine's return seemed inevitable. He was just too powerful.

I think you're the first person I've seen to defend bringing back Palpatine ;)

So this is probably a matter of opinion but, 2 things:

1. the nostalgia in the sequel trilogy was orders of magnitude more ham fisted and inorganic than anything in PIC S3. The Palpatine stuff alone is the poster child for nostalgia gone wrong and totally derailed the direction of the sequel trilogy.

Agree 100%. It's hard to say it didn't weaponize nostalgia when it was literally CGing dead actors into the films.
 
Palpatine shows up in Rise of Skywalker and it's a poster child for nostalgia gone wrong. The internet burns down. J.J. Abrams is the devil.

Borg Queen shows up in Picard season 3 and it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Star Trek is saved. Praise be to Terry Matalas.

BiEIoE7.jpeg

The internet confuses me.
 
Palpatine shows up in Rise of Skywalker and it's a poster child for nostalgia gone wrong. The internet burns down. J.J. Abrams is the devil.

Borg Queen shows up in Picard season 3 and it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Star Trek is saved. Praise be to Terry Matalas.

BiEIoE7.jpeg

The internet confuses me.

Look you obviously just didn’t like it apparently, so this is a mistake, but:

the Borg Queen surviving what Janeway did to her was internally consistent with what we know and have seen about how the Borg work (putting aside for the moment that giving the Borg a Queen was dumb) and her diminished state was logical and made sense in-universe, as did the bonkers desperation of her last ditch plot.

Palpatine coming back was, as I said earlier, an unearned rug pull that was orders of magnitude more lame. If they had set it up even a little bit artfully, if there had been even the tiniest notion that that was the plan all along it not only would have been well-received but probably as close to beloved as you can get nowadays. But it wasn’t.
 
Look you obviously just didn’t like it apparently, so this is a mistake, but:

the Borg Queen surviving what Janeway did to her was internally consistent with what we know and have seen about how the Borg work (putting aside for the moment that giving the Borg a Queen was dumb) and her diminished state was logical and made sense in-universe, as did the bonkers desperation of her last ditch plot.

Palpatine coming back was, as I said earlier, an unearned rug pull that was orders of magnitude more lame. If they had set it up even a little bit artfully, if there had been even the tiniest notion that that was the plan all along it not only would have been well-received but probably as close to beloved as you can get nowadays. But it wasn’t.

They were both dumb as dog shit.

Hell, you could say the whole bit in Episode III with Palpatine talking about learning to cheat death was foreshadowing enough to warrant Palpatine's return.

Still dumb.

Just like the Borg Queen showing up.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top