Lessons to be learned from the Kelvin Universe Films

[Lance]

Since it doesn't look like we are getting another Kelvin Universe movie for the foreseeable future, I thought it would be interesting to talk about lessons to learn from the Kelvin Universe movies. This franchise was popular at first, but lost steam over time and here is some things are worth looking at in that regard, I think these films did some things right but made some errors that cost them in the long run:

1. Strike while the iron is hot: There was a 4 year gap between Star Trek 09 and Into Darkness, which I think killed the momentum of the first film, next time the filmmakers should not let a gap like that happen again.

2. Better plan your franchise, I think there should have been an overall plan how this franchise would proceed and link the films in continuing story, these films seemed like random adventures rather than parts of a greater whole, while the original Star Trek movies from 2 to 4 had a story thread that continued throughout the series, elements of which were picked up in 6. Planning the franchise better would allow for tighter storytelling and give people more incentive to show up for the next film.

3. Do not over mine nostalgia: Here is the big problem with the second film, they brought in Khan too quickly and wanted to hit beats from Wrath of Khan so hard, they recreated an entire iconic scene from it. I do not mind a few callbacks or nods to other parts of the franchise, but that was overkill. They could have done anything, instead, they did the greatest hits version of Star Trek and brought back Khan. Into Darkness is my least favorite film of this series because of that.

4. Reign in the Budgets: I liked some of the special effects in these films, but sometimes it felt like they were throwing money at the screen hoping that would make the audience come in droves. There is a panning shot in Star Trek Beyond that is a beautiful shot of the York Town space station and we can see how much money they spent on it, it looks nice but adds nothing to the story, it looks like they blew the budget on something that could have been cut back. If some of these films were cheaper, they would have been more profitable.

Those are my take away points, what do you think?

I definitely feel like, Paramount never having an overall strategy about what the plotting of the movie franchise is has been problematic for a long time, but became extra obvious with the 2009-onwards films. The only stipulation they had was that the crew all be at their regular places aboard the Enterprise as the movie ends... but there was never an idea about what comes next, it was left ambiguous because Paramount always approaches Star Trek movies one at a time and green lights the next one based on the performance of the current one, rather than having enough faith in the franchise to plan it out. This was the undoing of the TNG movies also, but it became a serious reason that the Abrams movies, which *should* have had enough steam in them to run and run, instead ended up having four year gaps between movies, some problems in terms of coherently linking them together, and the overall feeling of them being missed opportunities. Instead of becoming the new wave of the franchise, they ended up becoming the stopgap until someone else picks up the baton.

The same on a larger scale with merchandising. There was no plan, no strategy for how to, as you put it, strike while the iron was hot. The action figure line died a quick death. The likenesses of the new characters took a while to be adopted by spin off media, but because there was a crippling lack of momentum as well as the complications of the CBS/Paramount split, the characters remained in that limbo, and ultimately have faded into background to their TOS counterparts once more. No-one is out there trying to make action figures of Pine's Captain Kirk or Quinto's Spock, not because they aren't worthy (their portayal of the characters was terrific), but because they simply never broke through, because the marketing strategy was shit. Whereas Shatner's Kirk continues on.

The whole thing was mismanaged. I *love* the Abrams films. But they were all cripplingly mismanaged, and I think where the movie franchise is here today ten years later only proves that. If you'd have asked me in 2009 where I thought the Star Trek film franchise would be in 2019, I'd have been excited and optimistic and anticipating... greater things than we got. I'd wager we all of us here on this site could say the same?

 

[MakeshiftPython]

In the beginning what we now call the "Kelvin timeline" was meant to be THE timeline. "Prime" was dead and apart from the odd novel or comic all future trek films/series would be in this new rebooted universe.

I'm not so sure about that. Before it became the "Kelvin timeline", it was mainly referred to as the "Alternate Reality", which Uhura coined. The name was very deliberate in that it suggested that the two different timelines could be able to coexist and not contradict each other so that Abrams and his writers could take their films in any direction. There was no declaration that Abrams' films were going to essentially replace the Prime timeline from then on for any future film/series, but I wouldn't blame fans for presuming that to be the case. A lot of us didn't know in 2009 that the franchise was as split as we knew a few years later.

Plus the reason the term "Kelvin timeline" was coined was in anticipation of the new CBS series that would be set in Prime, as the presumption then was that both the films and the series would go onto prosper well (this was before BEYOND under-performed at the box office), and there needed to be a more official sounding name than "alternate reality", which in retrospect sounds more generic.

It's kind of ironic that the timelines were named by the other company; Bad Robot coining "Prime" in 2009, and CBS coining "Kelvin" in 2016.

 

[Malaika]

Yeah, I don't think the kelvin timeline was supposed to delete prime trek. It would just be the recent thing and since it's new and has more potential, it's only natural the fans would focus on it for a while.
The tos version of these characters is done and over for me, I honestly don't see what they can do more by going into prime trek's past all the time to retcon things. In fact, I'm not convinced by discovery either. Sooner or later if you force it too much it will seem like a reboot and alternate reality anyway, regardless if you say it's prime timeline.
I still think that this reboot making another reality was genius. You truly have two versions of the characters to watch and love.

The way I see it, the plan could've been to develop the kelvin timeline in movies, novels and comics all the while you could still write sequels of the prime timeline for tv or movies . How? Like they are doing now with the Picard show: you take what happened to Romulus in the ST09 movie and further develop prime trek's future from that event. Neat, clean way to have a connection with the new movies but still develop two realities. Still have something to develop in prime trek too.

I hate to say this but discovery went backwards by being once again a prequel of tos. But then again we gotta blame most on it on the fact that the writers wouldn't be allowed to place the show in the kelvin timeline not even if they wanted to. But then again, why not make it a sequel of the old shows from the beginning.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I would have preferred a sequel set further in time for Prime, but from what we've been getting out of the second season of DISCOVERY so far I'm really liking where it is now. Kelvin or Prime, it's good Star Trek.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I think general people see the movies and Disco the same way they see the DC movies and TV shows. Different adaptations of the same thing, equally valid.

It's only us Trekkies who care about how the in-universe timelines work.

 

[Smellmet]

I think general people see the movies and Disco the same way they see the DC movies and TV shows. Different adaptations of the same thing, equally valid.

It's only us Trekkies who care about how the in-universe timelines work.

The third time my wife saw Star trek 2009 she asked if nimoy was 'spock's dad'

The third time of watching. General audiences just want to be entertained.

 

[chopperjockey]

Kelvin Universe? Nah, engineering is way too big, looks like an old boiler room. And the dam camera shakes too much. At least Prime was nicely filmed you could see the action...

 

[fireproof78]

I think general people see the movies and Disco the same way they see the DC movies and TV shows. Different adaptations of the same thing, equally valid.

It's only us Trekkies who care about how the in-universe timelines work.

My wife enjoyed it a lot.

 

[Ralphis]

Reign in the Budgets: I liked some of the special effects in these films, but sometimes it felt like they were throwing money at the screen hoping that would make the audience come in droves.

My thoughts exactly. I love Star Trek, and I liked the Kelvin films, but I just don't ever see Star Trek becoming the big summer action blockbuster Star Wars-y/superhero franchise Paramount wants it to be. Action is fine, don't get me wrong, but Star Trek should have cerebral moments, IMHO. (Not knocking Star Wars or superhero movies either). I'm not expert on film-making, but I can't help but think and $80-90 million budget would sufficient - enough to have a couple of engaging action sequences, but also would force them to really focus on the story.

 

[Smellmet]

I kind of agree with this to a point, some of the action and destruction was pretty gratuitous for a star trek movie (STID san fran destruction and Beyond saucer flip are two glaring examples) . I guess they had to try it just once the franchise being summer blockbuster series. I can see why they did it though and I'm glad it happened too. It's something I've secretly always wanted to see. I can also see why they are quite polarising and why a good chunk of the fanbase dislikes them too. Not me though. I love all three movies pretty much equally and they all occupy places 3, 4 and 5 in my top trek movies (in any order really too) behind TWOK and TMP.

Maybe any future trek movie will go back to lower budget more thoughtful stuff - it kind of has to really. I can't see Paramount ponying up silly money on another trek movie any time soon. I just don't see where a 500m plus film is going to come from at this point. They had their chance and got oh so close and they blew it.

 

[Hey Missy]

The Kelvin movies suffered because they gave the franchise to someone who really wanted to do Star Wars.

This is a controversial opinion but, yeah, it does seem that way. From phasers acting more like Star Wars' lasers to some of the makeup design choices.
Also, according to The Art of Star Trek, Kirk and OldSpock were originally going to meet up with Scotty and Keenser on Delta Vega in a bar full of "wacky aliens" with "a band playing", because that hot shot and his quiet friend had a way of getting them off the planet.
Abrams' infamous "I never liked Star Trek" interview, and essentially going "see ya, losers!" when offered The Force Awakens didn't help much.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

The Kelvin movies suffered because they gave the franchise to someone who really wanted to do Star Wars. The passion was never really there and once he left it created a void that nobody could properly fill.

This is a controversial opinion but, yeah, it does seem that way. From phasers acting more like Star Wars' lasers to some of the makeup design choices.
Also, according to The Art of Star Trek, Kirk and OldSpock were originally going to meet up with Scotty and Keenser on Delta Vega in a bar full of "wacky aliens" with "a band playing", because that hot shot and his quiet friend had a way of getting them off the planet.
Abrams' infamous "I never liked Star Trek" interview, and essentially going "see ya, losers!" when offered The Force Awakens didn't help much.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Star Trek 2009: What if you took Star Wars 1977 and elements of Yesterday's Enterprise and TWOK and made a movie.

 

[Vger23]

1. Don't wait four fucking years between movies.
2. Hire better writers
3. Market the fucking thing correctly.

Pretty fundamental stuff.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Lessons to be learned from the Kelvin Universe Films

Never trust a Vulcan.

 

[Vger23]

One should require no further evidence beyond this quote from the Wikipedia article on the film "Beyond" proving how drastically and incompetently Paramount mismanaged the film franchise and absolutely frigging blew it.

In 2013, Orci had begun writing the script with Patrick McKay and J. D. Payne, with Payne saying of the script in March, "We really want to get back to the sense of exploration and wonder. The kind of optimistic sense of the future that Star Trekhas always kind of had at its core. It's the Chicago Bulls in space, in terms of these people who are all awesome at their job."In January 2015, after Orci's departure as director, Simon Pegg and Doug Jung were hired to rewrite the screenplay, with Pegg saying on the previous draft, Paramount "had a script for Star Trek that wasn't really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y." Pegg had been asked to make the new film "more inclusive", stating that the solution was to "make a western or a thriller or a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters so it's more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent

Talk about not frigging getting it.....

But this absolutely confirmed what many suspected: they didn't want to make Star Trek movies. They wanted to make something else and use the brand.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

One should require no further evidence beyond this quote from the Wikipedia article on the film "Beyond" proving how drastically and incompetently Paramount mismanaged the film franchise and absolutely frigging blew it.



Talk about not frigging getting it.....

But this absolutely confirmed what many suspected: they didn't want to make Star Trek movies. They wanted to make something else and use the brand.

Back in 2016, the plan was to copy the style and feel of GOTG. WB came out with Suicide Squad and Paramount did Beyond. Suicide Squad did mega millions, without opening in China. While Beyond flopped. Then GOTG vol 2 comes out and blows both out of the water.

 

[Khan 2.0]

Back in 2016, the plan was to copy the style and feel of GOTG. WB came out with Suicide Squad and Paramount did Beyond. Suicide Squad did mega millions, without opening in China. While Beyond flopped. Then GOTG vol 2 comes out and blows both out of the water.

ST09 took note of the Batman/Bond reboots (and SW). STID took its cue from TDK.. and Beyond looked to GOTG..

and I guess whichever ST4 will go all Endgame (which ironically seemed to be a similar plot to Orcis ST3 )

 

[Vger23]

Back in 2016, the plan was to copy the style and feel of GOTG. WB came out with Suicide Squad and Paramount did Beyond. Suicide Squad did mega millions, without opening in China. While Beyond flopped. Then GOTG vol 2 comes out and blows both out of the water.

GOTG is shit compared to Trek.

 

[DonIago]

I wouldn't say GotG is shit compared to TFF or, at least in terms of characterization, TMP. I wouldn't call it that with regards to the new films either, though I'd at least regard those as a more fair comparison. If I felt there was any reason to compare them to begin with.

 

[Malaika]

One should require no further evidence beyond this quote from the Wikipedia article on the film "Beyond" proving how drastically and incompetently Paramount mismanaged the film franchise and absolutely frigging blew it.



Talk about not frigging getting it.....

But this absolutely confirmed what many suspected: they didn't want to make Star Trek movies. They wanted to make something else and use the brand.

I think the issue with Orci's script was just Shatner and the use of time travel. Those were elements the studio didn't like, not the stuff from that quote.
Regardless what Pegg and Lin claim, there were similarities between that story and beyond that probably was the cheaper version of what trek 3 originally was supposed to be.
I'm not saying Pegg and Jung plagiarized anything or they didn't have ideas. I can believe them that they didn't read Orci's script, but the producers did and told them to put X, y and Z in the movie, IMO. Even gay Sulu was something JJ himself had wanted to imply back in stid, yet Pegg kind of tried to get kudos for being innovative as if he was the first to even think about having non-straight characters when JJ had previoustly stated they had an idea for one and Orci confirmed it was Sulu in his movie too.

When the first trailer came out, Orci&co still got a credit, much to Lin's annoyance. Why?
Once you write a script for a studio, they own it and can use it.
Writers, for better or worse, get all the blame or praise but you gotta ask yourself how much of a script really is the story they want to tell and how much it's the studio and producers demanding them to write a script around their ideas.
I think jj&co probably had more real creative freedom only when they made the first movie. From stid onwards, including lin&Co, I have my doubts they were truly free to tell all the stories they wanted.