Forbes: How ‘Star Trek’ Became Obsolete Thanks To ‘Guardians,’ Fast & Furious’ And ‘Star Wars’

[fireproof78]

There has to be a way to be true to Star Trek AND tell a multi movie story where each one is complete and builds on the previous ones.

The struggle truly is what does it mean to remain "true to Star Trek." To my mind neither TMP nor TWOK hit that true note from TOS. Does that make them less Star Trek?

And, also for me, I will always struggle with hating a movie. I simply lack the willingness to put that much emotion in to something that I did not enjoy. If I didn't like the movie then it's just out of my life. I see no reason to invest beyond it. Hating it, to my mind, seems like a rather emotional dead end.

Obviously, mileage will vary and this may just be agree to disagree moment.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

Soran was a good villain, but his villainy is ruined by Lursa and B'Etor. They were okay TV villains, but they just derailed the film for me. When they enter the picture the film turns to crap. I just can't watch it. At least not very often.

Lursa & B'Etor weren't great villains but they were serviceable enough as secondary villains. It's not like they got much screentime.

If they want to go with movies with smaller budgets, as I've seen people mention before, budgets of $100 to $150 million dollars, then I would think it would be better to just put that into a TV series and get a 10 or 12 $10-million dollar per-episode TV show going. Which it seems like that's kind of what they're doing now.

I think that you're right. Like I said, mid-range movies aren't really a thing anymore. All of the resources & viewers that used to support mid-range movies have really shifted to TV series.

In fact, the reason I'm on TrekBBS at all is because of STID. After I saw the film I wanted to bitch about it somewhere. Imagine my horror when I found out people around here actually liked the movie.

I've been here since long before Star Trek Into Darkness but I was pretty horrified too. But after a few years, it seemed like the pendulum swung the other way. If anything, I think that a lot of people are overly harsh towards it now. But I can't complain too much because at least I feel vindicated.

Something about the 2009 film was right. It was off brand but it wasn't totally horrible. I think Simon Pegg fixed the issues, but Beyond needed something else. It was good Star Trek, but it was missing something epic. Films should not be like TV episodes. They should be epic, and that aspect was missing. But that is about all the 2009 and ID did have.

I completely agree with all of this.

 

[ChallengerHK]

The struggle truly is what does it mean to remain "true to Star Trek." To my mind neither TMP nor TWOK hit that true note from TOS. Does that make them less Star Trek?

I think this is very relevant, and along with another comment that I think was also yours,about calling something "not Star Trek" being a gatekeeping function, are great springboards.

It's very fashionable to say that stories are created by the readers and viewers, in a metaphorical sense. Obviously that is true in large part. Each of us came to Trek in some way, and each of us took away something from that experience that we identify as being "Trek." That begs two questions.

1. Can anything then be said to be Star Trek, if it means something different to everyone?
2. On a less metaphysical note, can something that is radically different still be referred to as "Star Trek"? If not, what are the limits to straying from the path?

 

[fireproof78]

If not, what are the limits to straying from the path?

This is a question that I feel will not really have a satisfactory answer, at least in my experience. When I ask it comes down to highly subjective "feelings" around what makes Star Trek Star Trek. And honestly, I get that. I mean, not all Trek is for all people. But, the definition is lacking and feels more like the definition of obscenity-"I can't describe it but I know it when I see it."

 

[ChallengerHK]

This is a question that I feel will not really have a satisfactory answer, at least in my experience.

I think you're right. I've come to the conclusion that "Star Trek" means so many and so many contradictory things that its only real value is as a marketing term.

 

[plynch]

TMP and TWOK did, in very different ways, go off from the TOS vibe/path, though I like em both. You know which movie seems closest to TOS. (That's a statement, not a question.)

You know you do.

TFF, in many ways.

Yet you all hate it.

 

[Charles Phipps]

TMP and TWOK did, in very different ways, go off from the TOS vibe/path, though I like em both. You know which movie seems closest to TOS. (That's a statement, not a question.)

Star Trek IV.

 

[ChallengerHK]

TFF, in many ways.

Yet you all hate it.

I have been saying the same thing since opening night. It has a lot of missteps, but it's constructured more like a TOS episode than any of the other films.

 

[Ovation]

Yet you all hate it.

I don’t. It’s in my top five of all Trek movies.

 

[fireproof78]

I don’t. It’s in my top five of all Trek movies.

Was just waiting for someone to pop in and say that.

 

[Smellmet]

TMP and TWOK did, in very different ways, go off from the TOS vibe/path, though I like em both. You know which movie seems closest to TOS. (That's a statement, not a question.)

You know you do.

TFF, in many ways.

Yet you all hate it.

I'd make an argument for TSFS too.

 

[Tenacity]

Films should not be like TV epsidodes. They should be epic

Debatably, a good direction for Trek movies to go moving forward would be to stop attempting to make every movie "epic." A extended episode might easily be exactly what a Trek movie needs to be.

TWOK was a extend episode, a continuation of a previous episode, and all the better for it.

Where were the epic space battles in TVH? Missing and the better for it.

FC, a continuation of the Borg arc begun in the TNG series. The big space battle at the beginning could have been largely omitted and it wouldn't have impacted the movie in the least.

Epic should not be seen as a priority.

 

[Mudd]

TMP and TWOK did, in very different ways, go off from the TOS vibe/path, though I like em both. You know which movie seems closest to TOS. (That's a statement, not a question.)

None are close enough to matter. It's like talking about which solar planet most threatens collision with Earth in its orbital path.

 

[Smellmet]

Debatably, a good direction for Trek movies to go moving forward would be to stop attempting to make every movie "epic." A extended episode might easily be exactly what a Trek movie needs to be.

I disagree. I think a movie should be an event that shows things over and above things that can be shown in the respective TV show. I think the trek films have largely achieved this, with a couple of exceptions.

TWOK was a extend episode, a continuation of a previous episode, and all the better for it.

But it still featured a planet terraforming/destroying weapon, two kick ass space battles among other things. I thought, whilst not the most 'epic' of Trek movies was still pretty good in that regard, especially considering it's budget. My epic rating 7/10

Where were the epic space battles in TVH? Missing and the better for it.

Despite it's largely earth bound story, it still featured a massive probe that was threatening planet-wide destruction, but I'll give you this, it's not particularly epic in the truest sense. Epic rating 6/10

FC, a continuation of the Borg arc begun in the TNG series. The big space battle at the beginning could have been largely omitted and it wouldn't have impacted the movie in the least.

But it still felt bigger than the TV series, as it should, but some of it looked cheap. 7/10

Epic should not be seen as a priority.

I think the lack of an epic feel has also hurt some of the trek movies in equal measure - most notably Insurrection (epic rating 2/10) Nemesis (4/10) and Beyond (5/10). Unless these films have some sort of ambition, I think audiences can be turned off by it being 'just another Star Trek movie'

TMP is the only genuine epic Star Trek flick. The reboots, whilst blockbusters, I don't quite see as 'epic' - but 2009 probably gets the closest.

 

[Mudd]

There's no way that a studio will spend the money necessary to give a big space movie like Star Trek the first-class visual production that fans want to see, unless they're going to slot it smack dab into the blockbuster category in order to have at least a shot at making a huge box office haul.

If that's not what you want, well, there's a shit-ton of Trek content currently on and upcoming on television and they're throwing enough resources at it that the worst of it is much bigger visually than any of the TOS or TNG movies.

 

[Smellmet]

There's no way that a studio will spend the money necessary to give a big space movie like Star Trek the first-class visual production that fans want to see, unless they're going to slot it smack dab into the blockbuster category in order to have at least a shot at making a huge box office haul..

They already have - four times, with TMP, 09, STID and STB, and they are the four most successful trek movies at the box office, though I agree with you moving forward from here there's no chance of a studio dropping the thick end of 200m on a trek movie. I would say given the state of the franchise from a movie point of view I'd say even 150m would be a stretch now.

 

[Mudd]

They already have - four times, with TMP, 09, STID and STB,

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with, here. I said that the studio will spend blockbuster money only in hopes of blockbuster returns, and you cited the four examples where they did exactly that.

In any event, the TOS movies and to a lesser degree most of the TNG movies predate the current industry model for producing, marketing and exhibiting "blockbusters." The question of foreign box office, for example, was an afterthought with ST:TMP when compared to the centrality of that now.

 

[Smellmet]

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with, here. I said that the studio will spend blockbuster money only in hopes of blockbuster returns, and you cited the four examples where they did exactly that.

In any event, the TOS movies and to a lesser degree most of the TNG movies predate the current industry model for producing, marketing and exhibiting "blockbusters." The question of foreign box office, for example, was an afterthought with ST:TMP when compared to the centrality of that now.

Your original post made it sound like it was never going to happen, but, doesn't matter, I was just expanding on your point really.