It has been zero years since the last movie. I know Section 31 sucked, but it was a movie.
News The ongoing next Star Trek movie thread
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
That movie should be counted as a TV movie. It's a high budget movie compared to movies that are only broadcast on TV. It's been 9 years since a Star Trek movie was last released in the cinema.
It's as much a Star Trek movie as Robocop: Prime Directives, Stargate Continuum or Babylon 5: Last of the Rangers were.
A TV movie is still a movie, though? If they'd said theatrical movie than sure, it's been a while, but nowadays the only difference between a movie and a TV show is length.
You'd have to ask Tawny. So far, she's the only one who was talking about it.
Section 31 was produced by the TV producers, not feature film producers. It was a glorified TV pilot. It's as much a 'movie' as Encounter at Farpoint was.
It was a glorified TV season, now. Notice how it briefly paused for a murder mystery? That would have been an episode. No modern pilot would work as a movie.
I guess the difference with Dark Frontier is that it was part of VOY, and even had episode numbers. It was just a particularly long episode. There's no show for Section 31 to be part of, so I view it as a movie.
Section 31 aside, just because a movie is made for tv doesn't automatically make it bad. There are a fair number of Tolkien fans who prefer the animated made-for-tv Hobbit movie as opposed to the 3 theatrical live action movies that came out, feeling that it did a better job of capturing the spirit of the book (and going by Christopher Tolkien's knowledge of his father and his own dislike of the live-action films, there's a good chance if JRR were alive he'd prefer the made-for-tv movie too).
Pet peeve of mine, I don't think the word broadcast should apply to streaming (although the dictionary disagrees with me). Broadcast should mean over the air and freely accessible, hence the "broad" part. And if you have to apply it to the internet, it should only apply to free streams. Anything on a pay service isn't "broad".
Richcast
I don't recall mentioning that.
if the jj made more star trek movies after beyond in 2016 and at least a few star trek movies between the 2nd one and the 3rd one by now we could have been at least between star trek 7 and 9
I do not consider section 31 as a part of classic star trek and I would not use the film to judge if trek 4 will be good and bad.
section 31 is part of streaming trek and they have their own quality and expectation.
Star Trek 4 is not on the same field as streaming star trek and I do not think Paramount would even give the people in charge of streaming trek the keys to star trek 4.
I will say they need to bring JJ Abrams back. I have issues with JJ Abrams television series and filmography but he is still a step way above anything I have seen from streaming star trek including section 31.
Or so, Paramount need to bring in the people from mission impossible or stick to Noah Hawley for screen play and let Abrams direct.
Movies made for TV may add to the overall quality. Also the expectation are just low in general for TV movies.
Star Trek 2009 came out 16 years ago and it is still far superior to any Star Trek TV of the 2000s in terms of quality. It been a summer movie helps a lot.
Although as a streaming trek watcher, streaming trek shows has a lot of serious issues and it boiled over so badly in section 31. I do not beleive that paramount will handle kelvin trek films like that. It will be way too risky.
What made star trek 2009 works so well was that it just modernised an old concept (TOS) for the millennial age.
A lot about streaming trek show is not modernization of an old concept, it is basically revisionist and reframing history of a series that did not need that in the first place. it will be way too risky for Paramount to go that route.
Skydance wants the TV and film sides of Star Trek to be integrated. If they want them to be integrated, they need to entrust the people who made the TV series to the film side. This includes Star Trek 4.
'Star Trek 4' is never going to happen, regardless. If they were even remotely serious about continuing the Kelvin series it would've happened years ago.
The next theatrical movie will be something new. Maybe it will be in the kelvin universe with a new cast, maybe it will be based on one of the shows, maybe it will be another reboot attempt. That all depends on the prevailing attitude among the decision makers *at the moment a movie manages to get an actual green light to start production*. So far we've gone over 9 years without them managing to get that far on any hypothetical new theatrical movie. And there's really no way of knowing how much longer we still have to wait (or who will be in charge when it finally happens).
The next theatrical movie will be something new. Maybe it will be in the kelvin universe with a new cast, maybe it will be based on one of the shows, maybe it will be another reboot attempt. That all depends on the prevailing attitude among the decision makers *at the moment a movie manages to get an actual green light to start production*. So far we've gone over 9 years without them managing to get that far on any hypothetical new theatrical movie. And there's really no way of knowing how much longer we still have to wait (or who will be in charge when it finally happens).
Last edited:
well never say never. Look at Top Gun Maverick, Devil wears Prada 2 and the social
network part 2.
Obviously we do not know much about what is really going on but I will say Paramount may be struggling in some areas. Their stock is way below Disney WB.
SNW is not even getting a full final season, Prodigy got cancelled and so did Lower Decks, section 31 flopped in every possible way. So the current trek content do not seem all that strong.
I do not think trek is making enough money for them, so they make think of another thing and as of now I think the Kelvin cast as still more popular than any streaming trek stuff so they will still be their best bet.
what seems to be the problem is budget. I have seen Dune and that film did not cast up to 200m.
If they can make a trek 4 for 150 million and marketing it spectually well and the movie gets the critical acclaim of the 2009 film then it should be fine.
I like to say this but right now star trek 4 will be a breath of fresh air for summer films when you think that comic book movies are drying up at the box office. every comic book film this year all performed below expectations.
a star trek movie may be just what we need and I have a very good suspicion that if it ever happens. paramount will put distance from it away from streaming star trek like DC movies does with their DC TV CW show.
Sigh...I just want to see Chris Pine and Zoe Saldana again and Quinto and John Cho as well. what a cast they were. I only appreciate them more now after I have seen not better cast.
What thing I liked about Star Trek Beyond is how the characters were now more mature perhaps they can play on that like Top Gun did. Make a Kelvin trek 4 and pass on the touch to the next generation of new characters.
Nothing you call a priority will happen because Paramount's new owner, David Ellison, is running Paramount with his father's money. So, it doesn't matter to them that current Star Trek TV series are losing money. The only reason those shows are losing money is because Paramount Plus isn't available everywhere. Countries like the Middle East, India, Greece, Eastern Europe, and Turkey have also chosen to license their content rather than include Paramount Plus. Beyond that, if they really want any Star Trek film to be profitable, they shouldn't be making those movies with a budget exceeding $100-120 million.
Similar threads
