The Star Trek Trilogy

[Solariabsg25]

As far as I am aware they didn't set out to make a trilogy. When TWOK was made, I don't think that had any plans to make a third movie.

Yes. If you notice the battle-damage on the effects miniature in III was far more extensive than that in II, as following TWOK ILM believed they would just be patching up and re-using the ship for the next movie. When Spock was slated for a return, and the decision made in the script for the destruction of the Enterprise extra battle-damage was added to make Stafleet's decision to decommission the ship rather than repair her more viable.

ILM were in fact hoping to use their new Excelsior miniature in the future, as they had not constructed the original refit Enterprise miniature and found it heavy and unwieldy to use (I read in an article somewhere that if one of the lights stopped working, they actually had to cut into the ship to replace it).

But certainly whatever the original intent TWOK-TVH does work as a great trilogy, and I regard it as such, more than once watching all three back-to-back.

 

[Spocklight]

I must say, this thread and this one http://www.trekbbs.com/threads/star-trek-wrath-of-khan-backlash.285042/
have got me so excited to see TUC again, will view it in a whole new way now.

 

[PCz911]

The TNG movies, as much as I love them, have no reason to exist, except as "entitlement." Burton isn't burdened with that VISOR, anymore. Spiner's still stuck in the makeup, but Data's got an emotion chip, Marina gets to talk normal and Stewart gets to be an action star. So, at least the cast got something new out of it. But for the audience, there is this sort of impression of, "oh ... you didn't like that TNG movie? OK, well ... how about THIS one? No? You didn't like that? OK ... how about ... THIS?!" At least Frakes was behind the wheel for a couple outings, which probably helped matters more than anyone can know ...

Wow, you are so right. I never thought of it this way before, but this is exactly true. This lack of vision as to what the movies should be And the character deviation from the tng series made these movies insufferable for me.

 

[2takesfrakes]

When the TOS movies came out, initially, there was no rhyme or reason to it, either, which would've proved interesting how things would've gone without a Nick Meyer/Harve Bennett combination.

These movies were also helped enormously by Nimoy's position on STAR TREK at the time. He didn't hate it, but he was in a legal battle with Paramount over use of his image, I believe, and he thought TMP was kind of how TOS movies would go, from now on, which he didn't like. (He did like the uniforms, though - he said they were "cool").

So, without that, there would've probably been no thought of Spock dying and how the movies would've unfolded, otherwise, seems to be more like how TNG's movies did. Just one visit to the well after another, without a causative link. As old as TOS' cast was, I seriously doubt there could've been more than 3 made, the other way. The last one might've even had to be a made-for-television feature, if they did make another one.

 

[Khan 2.0]

Yes not only was II the best one it shaped the trajectory of the entire film series, setting off a chain of events that spawned a trilogy (and epilogue in VI) plus the khan like villain out for revenge

Without II TOS would've just been like TNG movies for however long... that's what TNG needed - a trilogy.. and FC was the place to start