Why wasn't there ever a ds9 movie?

[Nightdiamond]

Nemesis earned less than $45 million domestically and would be the last Star Trek film produced by Berman.

"The reviews of the film were, I would say, 80 per cent miserable," admitted Berman. "The film did nowhere near as well as the tracking results had predicted."

That type of thinking could be the reason the last two T.N.G movies failed at the box office and deprived the fans of a DS9 movie, partically featuring the Dominion war.

Sometimes, a "why not" attitude is good for projects like this, because it has paid off in the past.

The general idea was that T.N.G was popular, and therefore it was going to be a popular box office hit.

Still, the fans were probably thinking the same thing the O.P had in mind. They wanted to see an action style movie, and since the Domion war was happening, they would love to see that.

Instead, they were disappointed, and that was reflected in the box office numbers and reviews.

Ironically, it was the last T.N.G movies that supposedly, helped slowed the franchise down ( you'll hear reviewers often saying that the trek franchise was waning in recent years.)

 

[Hober Mallow]

TNG isn't just more popular, it's become iconic. Mention Captain Picard to someone you've never met before, and he'll know who you're talking about. Mention Captain Sisko and you're likely to get a blank stare. If it were my business to sell popcorn, I'd go for the Captain Picard movie, too.

What I don't get is why, after seeing what they did to TNG in their movies, any fan would still want a DS9 movie.

 

[Zeppster]

DS9's ratings were poor. They weren't even moved to UPN when that network finally started and Voyager was on there(you would think they would have at least moved it there and had a night of Star Trek instead it was in syndication) the network never really cared about the show. TNG is one of the highest rated syndicated shows ever outside of ones that were rerun. Despite good writing for DS9 the show wasn't getting the ratings and another problem with it is the arcs made it hard to follow if you missed an episode which is really bad to miss for syndicated shows because it's easier to miss syndicated shows because they are usually on at times when you aren't at home. Also a DS9 movie would have to explain too much if it was done after the movie. You would can get away with explaining away one of those and not have a problem but almost all the federation characters outside of Bashir left DS9. Well and Dax, but Ezri was such a weak character it didn't matter. Having a DS9 movie without half the cast just wouldn't work.

 

[Daneel]

It simply wouldn't be realistic to expect Paramount to finance a big-screen DS9 movie -- the series just wasn't popular enough. DS9 was reasonably successful as far as syndicated dramas go, but it never developed into a mainstream hit. TNG, on the other hand, was a syndicated phenomenon, and it was the last Trek series to permeate the public consciousness.

A DS9 TV-movie or direct-to-video movie might have been more feasible, but for better or worse, we'll never know.

 

[od0_ital]

They weren't even moved to UPN when that network finally started and Voyager was on there...

UPN was built around Star Trek: Voyager.

DS9 had already been in syndication for two & a half years, there were contracts in place that kept it in syndication, not to mention, the syndicated airings would reach more folks than UPN for the first couple of years.

I know that Austin didn't even have UPN available 'til that network got Buffy the Vampire Slayer from the WB.

Time-Warner had to get a station out of San Antonio to air it.

 

[Disillusioned]

I would definitely be a fan of a DS9 movie, even if it was a "passing the torch" type movie from the TNG cast. The problem is that by now the cast members have moved on to other things and it might be hard to get them all back (not to mention the visible aging). A for Paramount, the people who run that company are convinced that a movie that doesn't include "familiar" names like Enterprise, Kirk, Spock, Picard, Data, etc, would fail because the "normal" people that they are trying to target movies at would be confused.

 

[nx1701g]

I just watched a DS9 episode that supposedly took place at the same time as "Insurrection" and it just left me wondering why the hell that movie didn't deal with the Dominion War. It could have been called "Star Trek: Dominion" and shown the Enterprise E's place in the war. It didn't even have to be a "crossover" with DS9, the characters could have just had cameos...maybe show the Enterprise crew stopping by at DS9 and interacting with some of the crew at the end, just to give it an ending with a nice feeling of 'family' and something for the fans too.

Maybe an onscreen Captain's log narration from Picard could bring the 'uninitiated' up to speed on DS9 and the war a little, so there isn't so much time wasted on exposition. The fact that Michael Piller, co-creator of DS9 wrote Insurrection just leaves me even more baffled as to why they didn't take advantage of this great story arc going on at the time instead of wasting a big screen Star Trek story on a rote, morally flimsy, and convoluted story.

I remember reading in a behind the scenes book - I think it was the sketch book - that they DID consider insurrection being a Dominion War movie. However, TPTB decided against it because of DS9's ratings and fears that the general populace wouldn't have a clue about anything in the movie and wouldn't see it. They also had planned for the film to end the Dominion War which didn't please the creative staff of DS9 all that much.

 

[Anthony Sabre]

I remember reading in a behind the scenes book - I think it was the sketch book - that they DID consider insurrection being a Dominion War movie. However, TPTB decided against it because of DS9's ratings and fears that the general populace wouldn't have a clue about anything in the movie and wouldn't see it. They also had planned for the film to end the Dominion War which didn't please the creative staff of DS9 all that much.

Now that's interesting. Never heard that before. There was obviously an element within TPTB that wanted to somehow kill DS9. Remember how they wanted to destroy the Defiant in First Contact as well?

No matter what way you slice it, a DS9 movie was (and is) highly unlikely. The only realistic way to have done one was to tie it in with the TNG crew. And all those salaries would have been ungodly. Besides TNG was the 2nd most popular Trek and faired badly at the box office, as already stated.

I'm OK with no DS9 movie. For the most part, I feel good about the way the series concluded.

 

[Nightdiamond]

I think that not giving the fans the obvious was the reason the last T.N.G movies failed. The fans wanted to see space action.

For example, in "First Contact", we saw a great Borg Battle, with the Defiant. First Contact was a critical popular and box office hit.

"Insurrection" and "Nemesis" were seen as box office failures, perhaps because of the stories, writing, and lack of creativity.

Yet the analyses was said to predict the fans would respond favorably, mainly because T.N.G was popular, and the fans were familar with it.

 

[RyuRoots]

Sorry, but...what's "TPTB"?

The lack of any Dominion War in Insurrection aside from a MENTION of ketricel white always irritated me (and Insurrection is the only TNG film that I make no attempt to defend). In fact, didn't Picard say they had an archaelogical survey planned? During this war? They basically treated it like "Oh hey yeah whatever, that's a thing that's happening" and gave it no more attention than that so they could have all this idiocy with the Ba'ku and the Son'a.

And that's a good point about the salaries. As far as the movie itself...I'm happy with how the show ended, but it would've been really cool to see the DS9 cast and crew on the big screen. Then again...an Insurrection-quality movie with the DS9 crew....ugh. So maybe it's just as well.

 

[Michael]

"Insurrection" and "Nemesis" were seen as box office failures, perhaps because of the stories, writing, and lack of creativity.

Eh, I'd say they were seen as box office failures because no-one watched them and they made no money.

Sorry, but...what's "TPTB"?

The Powers That Be.

 

[Daneel]

I remember reading in a behind the scenes book - I think it was the sketch book - that they DID consider insurrection being a Dominion War movie. However, TPTB decided against it because of DS9's ratings and fears that the general populace wouldn't have a clue about anything in the movie and wouldn't see it. They also had planned for the film to end the Dominion War which didn't please the creative staff of DS9 all that much.

Now that's interesting. Never heard that before. There was obviously an element within TPTB that wanted to somehow kill DS9. Remember how they wanted to destroy the Defiant in First Contact as well?

I think that kind of cut both ways, though. I don't recall where I heard it, but apparently Behr wanted to actually destroy the Enterprise-D in "The Jem'Hadar", but Berman and Paramount, for obvious reasons, wouldn't let him, so he had to settle for the U.S.S. Odyssey, another Galaxy-class starship.

As for Insurrection not dealing with the Dominion War... eh, I'm okay with that. I'll admit, watching the movie, you'd never get the sense that the Federation was embroiled in a bitter, costly war, but at least they mentioned the Dominion a couple of times rather than ignore it completely. Besides, DS9 itself didn't even focus on the war in every episode of Seasons 6 and 7.

 

[Anticitizen]

I think DS9 did a pretty damn good job of wrapping up its own plotlines and story arcs for characters. The show ended with a sense of completeness and finality that we didn't really get from TNG (including the movies). I think trying to shoehorn in further stories beyond the finale would do the show a disservice.

 

[DS9forever]

To those who said DS9 had low ratings:


"Deep Space Nine spent most of its lifetime as the number one syndicated first-run show on television despite its falling number of viewers. Even when it became a near-serial show (usually, long-term serial shows are ratings disasters -- witness Babylon 5) airing in prime-time in less than 60 percent of the nation, DS9 managed well over a 4.0 average in its final two years. As a general rule, a syndicated show needs to maintain a 3.0 to be successful, DS9 always maintained that despite the strikes against it. Look at the other sci-fi shows similar to DS9: Earth: Final Conflict is regarded as a decent show ratings-wise, staying in the lower 3.0 range and Babylon 5 is the hot potato of science fiction television -- it's done so poorly that no one wants to hold on to it.
As a serial, more cultish television show, DS9 is right behind the X-Files on the all-time list of successes even with extreme disadvantages."

http://www.treknation.com/articles/ratings_history.shtml

 

[Anthony Sabre]

To those who said DS9 had low ratings:


"Deep Space Nine spent most of its lifetime as the number one syndicated first-run show on television despite its falling number of viewers. Even when it became a near-serial show (usually, long-term serial shows are ratings disasters -- witness Babylon 5) airing in prime-time in less than 60 percent of the nation, DS9 managed well over a 4.0 average in its final two years. As a general rule, a syndicated show needs to maintain a 3.0 to be successful, DS9 always maintained that despite the strikes against it. Look at the other sci-fi shows similar to DS9: Earth: Final Conflict is regarded as a decent show ratings-wise, staying in the lower 3.0 range and Babylon 5 is the hot potato of science fiction television -- it's done so poorly that no one wants to hold on to it.
As a serial, more cultish television show, DS9 is right behind the X-Files on the all-time list of successes even with extreme disadvantages."

http://www.treknation.com/articles/ratings_history.shtml

That's a nice summation of DS9's performance. It's been years since I looked at the Nielsen ratings for DS9. Back in the day, DS9 and VOY fans alike used to beat each other over the head with them.

 

[robtclements]

That's still a lot less than TNG did; & even it looked deucedly old-fashioned as film entertainment when Nemesis came out (after DS9 closed). Look at the multiplex screenings, particularly in the US - do you find anything that's well written?, or with characters who can be considered vaguely sympathetic? With THAT as your benchmark, what change did the Niners have?

(It's taken me a while to realise that one of my main objections to the new film is that Kirk is basically unsympathetic in the finest Adam Sandler tradition, a prick indulging his inner George W Bush. It was tolerable in ST XI; but may become unwatchable if the sequels are any less virtuousic in blinding you to their own sleight of hand)

 

[ParLawGod]

Although it NEVER would have happened...I would have enjoyed a DS9 Borg movie. I think that would have to be my ultimate fantasy.

(lol, I'm expecting to get flamed for this one)

 

[Steve Roby]

What I don't get is why, after seeing what they did to TNG in their movies, any fan would still want a DS9 movie.

I second that emotion. The TNG movies lost a lot of the ensemble cast feel in order to cater to Stewart and Spiner. They also focused on action to an extent the TV series rarely did. The best TNG appeared on TV, not in movies.

DS9 didn't really impinge on the mass audience's consciousness the way TOS and TNG did, but it got seven years on TV. That's pretty damn good. Bear in mind that DS9 was by far the most complex of the Star Trek TV series. The most popular Trek movies have been the ones aimed at the mainstream movie audience more than the hardcore fans, and the mainstream audience has no clue about DS9. The idea that millions of people would go to see a movie as drenched in arcane continuity as a Dominion War DS9 movie strikes me as wishful thinking. A lot of what we love about DS9 would be thrown out the window if a movie were made, in order to tailor it to the mass audience.

 

[JoeD80]

To those who said DS9 had low ratings:


"Deep Space Nine spent most of its lifetime as the number one syndicated first-run show on television despite its falling number of viewers. Even when it became a near-serial show (usually, long-term serial shows are ratings disasters -- witness Babylon 5) airing in prime-time in less than 60 percent of the nation, DS9 managed well over a 4.0 average in its final two years. As a general rule, a syndicated show needs to maintain a 3.0 to be successful, DS9 always maintained that despite the strikes against it. Look at the other sci-fi shows similar to DS9: Earth: Final Conflict is regarded as a decent show ratings-wise, staying in the lower 3.0 range and Babylon 5 is the hot potato of science fiction television -- it's done so poorly that no one wants to hold on to it.

Thanks for that info about DS9. Yeah, DS9 didn't do bad. I always had the impression it was one of the better rated syndicated shows. However, it's odd to say long-term serial shows are usually disasters. Shows like Dallas and Northern Exposure thrived. And Babylon 5 was not a ratings disaster either. It generally was at a 3.0 or a 4.0 each season and usually picked up more viewers as the seasons progressed. (I also don't understand hot-potato -- it was on PTEN for as long as PTEN existed, for its first four seasons). It even beat DS9 in the demographics on occasion. The last season had lower numbers but it was on Cable then, *not* syndication.

 

[Too Much Fun]

Just because it took place during the Dominion War doesn't mean a TNG movie set in that period would have to end the war. We could have just seen a key turning point or event of it, which would be wrapped up in the movie while the war itself continued on DS9. All DS9 would need to do is make a small, non-essential reference to it (like when Sisko just briefly mentioned 'the encounter with the Borg' as being why Starfleet was spread a little thin at the moment).

If the people behind the movie were wiser and braver, they could have done what the first "X-Files" movie did. It picks up from the events that end season 5 of the series and by the end of it, the stage is set for season 6. And yet at the same time, it was made open-ended enough and given enough mostly subtle backstory (there's an unintentionally hilarious scene were Mulder bascially explains the whole premise of the show to a bartender while he's drunk...what's funny is that it's supposed to sound natural) that you didn't have to be someone who watched the show before the movie (or start watching the show after seeing the movie) to feel like it was a complete standalone piece.