Films are always about the same guys

[Darth Thanos]

I have noticed that the films are always about the same characters: either the original series, or the Next Generation ones. Or the reboot films, which are the original series but recasted.

But Star Trek had more series, and great actors with them. Deep Space 9, Voyager, Enterprise, Discovery, Strange New Worlds... Why wasn't there a film for any of them?

 

[fireproof78]

Why wasn't there a film for any of them?

Money.

 

[Finn]

People would get confused watching a bunch of folks on a space station in a Star Trek movie, and confused by a woman captain on the Enterprise (Yeah, some of them won't understand it's not the Enterprise even if someone say Voyager).



Oh, and money.

 

[at Quark's]

To take a random couple, Garak/Bashir had their set of fans. Just not as many as Picard or Kirk to warrant a big screen movie.

 

[XCV330]

I have noticed that the films are always about the same characters: either the original series, or the Next Generation ones. Or the reboot films, which are the original series but recasted.

But Star Trek had more series, and great actors with them. Deep Space 9, Voyager, Enterprise, Discovery, Strange New Worlds... Why wasn't there a film for any of them?

The Berman era shows were bookended by a TNG crew that wouldn't go away, hell they even managed to close out the era entirely with TATV. DS9, ENT, VOY were never going to get a shot at it, esp with Nemesis putting a stake through the heart of that era.

It's still too early to say that Disco, SNW or any of the other new shows WOULDN'T get a movie. I think they're doing well enough right now with them not to worry about it.

 

[somebuddyX]

Not everything needs to be a film. DS9 worked better as a long form TV series. Was anyone really asking for a Voyager film? Enterprise would not have been a cinematic draw, but I could see it being direct-to-DVD films back in the day like Stargate SG-1. The safe bet was doing a TOS reboot film because the franchise needed to reestablish itself and get some normies in. A film can't just be for the fans. It doesn't mean it can't have good ideas and we've seen independent IP sci-fi make decent money before (Interstellar, The Martian, Gravity)
As to Star Trek films about other characters, well Star Trek 11 could have been a Romulan War film with a new cast, and Noah Hawley wanted to do Star Trek 14 with new characters.
But with streaming and high quality production of series, is there any point doing a theatrical film? I would like to see the Kelvin team again but I kinda wish it was in four or six standalone-ish episodes so you could see them do a bunch of different stuff instead of one adventure every five years.

 

[The Wormhole]

TOS and TNG are the popular Treks. DS9, Voyager and Enterprise just aren't popular enough to warrant movies. Disco and SNW are still in production on TV.

 

[Orphalesion]

I feel DS9 had way too much baggage to be accessible to mainstream theatre audiences. And even if...what would the movie have been about? The story was finished at the end of the last episode.
From what I have seen, and how often it was mentioned in pop culture from that time, Voyager seems to have been more popular than DS9 at the time. But I'm not sure it was popular enough to get mainstream audiences in the theatres. And also..what would the movie have been about?
Enterprise, I'm not even going to dignify with any what if scenario.

In the end, even if you look at the TNG movies...with most of them they seemed to have struggled to come up with stories that were good enough for theatres. With he possible exception of First Contact they all feel just like long episodes of the show and I'm surprised they even managed to make four of them.

 

[at Quark's]

Given how the TNG movies panned out, I'm not even sure if DS9 going to the movies would have been doing the legacy of the series a favor. You'd probably have gotten something quite different from the series in spirit even if it had all the same actors in it.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Movies cost a lot of money, if the series doesn't have enough eyes on it, a movie based on it is unlikely to do well. TOS and TNG were HUGE, everything else is small fry in comparison.

I still think Paramount+ should do some movie-length one-shots. Long Treks, if you will. It'd be a cool way to meet new characters and explore weird corners of the galaxy.

 

[V'Lias]

I've always preferred Star Trek in a series format over movies. Movies are usually a short push to the big action scene at the end, which in my opinion leaves little time to build out the world and characters.

 

[Greg Cox]

Bottom line: Movies need to appeal to the general audience, not just us hardcore fans.

For whatever reasons, irregardless of quality, the other series never caught on with the general public the way TOS and TNG did.

 

[The Wormhole]

From what I have seen, and how often it was mentioned in pop culture from that time, Voyager seems to have been more popular than DS9 at the time.

Trying to determine whether DS9 or Voyager were the more popular show is tricky. DS9 did get higher ratings in first run, though Voyager actually did better in syndicated reruns. Regardless, neither show were as popular as TNG, and given the TNG movies weren't hits, there's no way DS9 or Voyager could have been practical options as a movie.

 

[F. King Daniel]

IIRC, Voyager's "Endgame" was the most watched Trek episode on Netflix a few years ago. I'm sure the streaming numbers contribute to Seven, Janeway and others being in the modern shows.

 

[Forbin]

For whatever reasons, irregardless of quality...

 

[Richard S. Ta]

TOS and TNG are the popular Treks. DS9, Voyager and Enterprise just aren't popular enough to warrant movies. Disco and SNW are still in production on TV.

I'd feel very surprised if either SNW or DSC would make the leap to the cinema after respectively wrapping up.

 

[JesterFace]

I've always preferred Star Trek in a series format over movies.

And here we have the correct answer.

 

[Mojochi]

The longer this franchise goes on, the less sense any of the theatrical films are going to make in a context to new fans just discovering them.

1. When the original cast made their movies they were the only cast.
2. When TNG made their movies, they were the subsequent cast, that managed a greenlight on some films due to its own popularity at the time.
3. When the reboot original cast made their movies, they were just that, a reboot, devoid of any real relationship to the franchise on the whole.
4. No other incarnation of Star Trek nor any of its vast collection of characters has ever been successful or popular enough to merit a similar theatrical greenlight for them.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'd feel very surprised if either SNW or DSC would make the leap to the cinema after respectively wrapping up.

Somehow, a Discovery-meets-Kelvinverse movie was considered at one point. Since streaming viewership is much smaller than TV ones, it sounds mad to me but that's likely Paramount simply not having a clue what to so with theatrical Trek.

 

[Farscape One]

Bottom line: Movies need to appeal to the general audience, not just us hardcore fans.

For whatever reasons, irregardless of quality, the other series never caught on with the general public the way TOS and TNG did.

I have always felt that the reason why TOS and TNG have been the most popular with general audiences was lack of competition.

In TOS' case, it was the only crew in the franchise for 20 years.

In TNG's case, there were very few scifi shows on the air during its first few years, and TNG only had TOS as the other show in the franchise for over 5 years.