Should they still make movies in the Kelvin Universe?

Fuck yes!

 

Actually the Beyond sets were all built entirely from scratch, which was cheaper than shipping them. The Enterprise sets had already been painted black and heavily modified to serve as the USS Vengeance by then anyway and would have needed extensive reverse engineering.

There were rumours in 2015 that the ST'09/ID sets were sold off, but I suspect union rules might have forbidden that?

 

Think I remember those rumors too now that you mention it.

 

I'm crossing my fingers for more films with this cast.

 

I don't hate the Kelvin universe. I like it for the most part and I like the cast. Though I would be okay with them not doing more. Or if they did a spin off Sulu-led Excelsior series. Though I would also be okay with them turning the Kelvin time line story into a television as well. It would be great if they could work out all these rights issues and just release a Kelvin verse All Access series, or even better, place Discovery within the Kelvin timeline (though I know it's too late for that now, definitely with the casting of the new Spock).

 

I'd like Pine and his cast to have one more go, but I don't see it happening. If BEYOND turns out to be their swan song, I think it's a good way for them to exit, whether that was intentional or not. I just love that one shot of Kirk, Spock and Bones looking up at the construction of the E-A.

 

Huh? 257m vs. 228m is a difference of 8%.

How is that not close?

 

Beyond, in terms of domestic net, actually lost money. It & Nemesis are the only Trek movies with negative domestic nets.

However, Beyond also made more non-domestically than domestically. STID is the only other Trek movie in that category. More foreign profit now than before. Important to remember for comparisons.

However, for the studio, Beyond still made roughly $189 million. ST09 & STID both did over $300 million net worldwide. So a decline, but making $200 million ain't nothing to sneeze at.

 

Hahahahahahahaha! - Star Trek has never been one single continuity since TAS appeared on TV in 1973, then ST:TMP in 1979 plus all the feature films, and then TNG, etc.

If you are going to even try to claim TNG was 100% internally consistent...again...Hahahahahahahaha!

 

On a broad level, Trek from 1966-2005 was one continuity, however imperfect it was.

I have nothing against there being a new continuity with the Kelvin universe. I think it at least opens up more possibilities to play with established characters without having to make blatant continuity errors. I only wish ST09 had been a harder reboot without any connection to the Prime universe.

 

You really don't understand the difference between "continuity errors" (in one single continuity), and "entirely new continuity", as in a reboot or something, do you?

TMP is a direct, in-continuity continuation of TOS. So is TNG. And don't tell me DS9 and VOY don't take place in the same universe as well. That would be just... ridiculous.

 

Kelvin Timeline or Another Reboot.

Going back to the Prime Timeline, at least for the films, is a mistake. There's nothing to go back to with the older casts. If the Picard Series takes off, maybe they can do more with the shows from the Berman Era there. I think that type of Star Trek works better on television anyway.

 

I'm kind of past it now. I was as welcoming of it as I could, but then it was like I could never sync up with it and it's expanded material. Couldn't muster interest in the YA fiction, but was looking forward to the other four novels...that got cancelled, so I can never read them. I turned to a collection of 80's TOS novels as an alternative. I looked at the comics, curious to see what new adventures the were going to have...and they are rehashing a TOS story with a slight difference. Then a new story, then a rehash. And the stories they're choosing to redo, well I flipped through them and felt unenthusiastic.

And then there were these long waits in between movies. The comic series is a bit beyond me now. I picked up a couple random ones, and saw Klingon starships with Narada spike-heads. And then a TNG foe that feels too disconnected from TOS for me.

They destroyed the ship in the last movie and I had mixed feelings about it. It's such a cliche now; and at the same time it was one of my least favorite incarnations of Enterprise; I only empathized with what that meant for the character of Captain Kirk.

JJ Abrams doesn't seem supportive. The studio seems to have flinched, and got burned for blinking. Chris Pine and Thor didn't like how the negotiations are going. It seems like the star-power they recruited for the first film is cost-prohibitive for assembling the ensemble for one more go at this point. Beyond was disappointing and I'm ok with moving on. Assemble a team of filmmakers committed to returning and come up with a new approach, and cast new actors who are talented.

I say move on, I'm fine with the movies to move on and try some other things. I would still jump for novels set in the Kelvin timeline that explore what happens between movies, during their version of the 5YM, and also new adventures on their version of the Enterprise-A.

 

I really don't care which universe it is in.

I thought the first Abrams film was quite good, but the second and third were awful in my opinion. No story, no heart. Just big explosions, strange music choices, weird chases. There was nothing Star Trek about them. It all became rather ordinary. So I lost interest and now we have Star Trek back on TV, where it belongs, so I care even less about the movies.

My hope for a new Star Trek film is a movie on a ‘small’ budget, like 100 to 120 million, with more emphasis on story and characters and less on special effects and big explosions. Something like Arrival or Interstellar.

A fresh start with a new crew, new ship or no ship at all… To boldy go where no Star Trek movie has gone before in a long long time.

And stop making a movie about a villain!!!

 

I still think there's milage in it

I don't disagree with the premise that the two sequels mismanaged the potential the first movie had in revitalizing the franchise, and that they should've been putting more energy into refining them, it beggars belief to me that there were four years between the 2009 movie and their sequel, and here we are nine years later and we only have three canon adventures, but I believe in the cast dynamic and I still believe in the potential of it.

That being said, it was mismanaged. And the wind in the sails that the 2009 movie had has arguably blown past now. Starting again seems sensible, though I'd favour the idea of refreshing with a completely new take than another reboot or revival.

 

I thoroughly enjoy the Kelvin timeline movies. I started with the first one, then that made me want to watch the Original series. I love the actors in their character roles, Karl Urban as Bones is someone I look forward to seeing in each movie that comes out. I really hope they do add more Kelvin timeline movies.

 

I loved the first movie, thought 'Into Darkness' was terrible (but not to the extent of losing sleep over it), absolutely loved 'Beyond'.

I've always been a TOS fan first and foremost - never really got into TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT - so would much rather have a fourth Kelvin-verse movie than a movie with any other crew. Even if it's mediocre. Hell, it could be two hours of McCoy and Spock insulting each other, and I'd pay to watch it. IMNSHO, their scenes were the best bits of 'Beyond'...

 

Persuaded a co-worker to watch 'Beyond' just last week - she's not a Trekkie by any means - even she thinks Karl Urban (or The Doctor Guy, as she called him) had all the best scenes and lines. Just a pity he (and others) had so little to do in 'Into Darkness'...

 

Yes. Except more exploring and nothing to do with revenge,

 

Despite CBS making a Kelvin Universe game, I think the first thing they should do IF they takeover Viacom is take the Kelvin Universe out back and put it out of its misery.

As an audience member, is there even any point in having Star Trek movies when you can get exactly the same thrills from a CBS All Access presentation?

I think they'd have more success making a series of $50M movies for CBS All Access, than one big feature film that barely makes a profit.