Why isn't Star Trek a big movie franchise?
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
I went to see Star Wars 13 times when it came out. I went to see TMP too - I'd been watching Trek for ages.
For neither franchise did I then,when I was a kid, or now when I'm an adult, ever want toy figures, ships etc. No interest whatsoever.
Books, comics, spin offs - anything STORY based I grabbed with both hands...
For neither franchise did I then,when I was a kid, or now when I'm an adult, ever want toy figures, ships etc. No interest whatsoever.
Books, comics, spin offs - anything STORY based I grabbed with both hands...
I enjoy the output - particularly Beyond and hopefully Discovery, but I really don't care for the way Star Trek has been handled since 2005. Enterprise basically slipping through the cracks of the Paramount/CBS split, and resultant 11 year absence from TV, will always be at the heart of the problem for me.
During that time CBS Entertainment did plough effort into remastering TOS, TNG and their extras, also for ENT on Blu-ray. But they're not a drama producing studio and without regular ongoing production, attracting new viewers to the back catalogue, it's just an ever diminishing hardcore... usually waiting for them to reduced in price.
Nothing would make happier than say, an Enterprise era spin-off movie during the Romulan War... the Franklin, Idris Elba, Scott Bakula in there somewhere. In some alternate universe where Beyond was #1 at the box office for 2 or 3 weeks maybe.
During that time CBS Entertainment did plough effort into remastering TOS, TNG and their extras, also for ENT on Blu-ray. But they're not a drama producing studio and without regular ongoing production, attracting new viewers to the back catalogue, it's just an ever diminishing hardcore... usually waiting for them to reduced in price.
Nothing would make happier than say, an Enterprise era spin-off movie during the Romulan War... the Franklin, Idris Elba, Scott Bakula in there somewhere. In some alternate universe where Beyond was #1 at the box office for 2 or 3 weeks maybe.
Last edited:
Why do people think The Force Awakens is a remake of A New Hope? I wonder what gave them that idea!?
I have to give this one to you. Unfortunately you're absolutely right. I know that Star Wars is more popular than Star Trek and that Disney is bigger studio than Paramount but I would expect at least some merchandise in stores. It's only been five months since a new movie was out and it is the 50th anniversary of the franchise! And I want that Nerf phaser… for the kids of course…
I have to give this one to you. Unfortunately you're absolutely right. I know that Star Wars is more popular than Star Trek and that Disney is bigger studio than Paramount but I would expect at least some merchandise in stores. It's only been five months since a new movie was out and it is the 50th anniversary of the franchise! And I want that Nerf phaser… for the kids of course…
A recurring merchandising blitz keeps things bubbling over. But it's not the gamechanger thing some of you guys seem to think it is. Getting the toys n' the models right will do good but it won't put nuTrek on par with Star Wars.
You have to present a story that stirs the soul and you have to arc it up to get people coming back. And that is it. Whether it's proven formula or a fresh revolution are secondary questions because you can foul up/succeed which ever direction that you decide to go in.. And also you have to face the possibility that the Star Wars swashbucklers have just more mass appeal than the Trek ensemble, certainly in the cinematic space.
You have to present a story that stirs the soul and you have to arc it up to get people coming back. And that is it. Whether it's proven formula or a fresh revolution are secondary questions because you can foul up/succeed which ever direction that you decide to go in.. And also you have to face the possibility that the Star Wars swashbucklers have just more mass appeal than the Trek ensemble, certainly in the cinematic space.
Star Wars is certainly more suited to swashbuckling and two hour cinematic chunks, but yes, you have to tell a stirring story.
The Force Awakens and ST2009 both have similarities to me. First outing for a rebooted/reinstated franchise, and neither exactly great. In fact, I think I like ST2009 marginally more, even though The Force Awakens was always going to be the bigger draw.
However, after their first outings, their direction of travel is very different. ST got worse with STID and worse still with Beyond. From lagging behind with The Force Awakens, Star Wars came back impressively with Rogue One, one of the best in the franchise.
Star Wars was always big enough to ride out a duff instalment and came back strong. Star Trek had a shot with 2009, but descended into drivel...
I do agree with everything you have said. I also believe that ST09 relied to heavily on TOS which kind of hurt it. The shuld have done a clean reboot with no ties to TOS. Funny but I can barely remember the story for STB. Its just wasn't very entertaining. I remember every detail of SWTFA and RO. They were definitely better movies and had what you described as swashbuckling which was something that was included in Treks best films and done right with a good solid story to back it up.
Last edited:
I also remember every detail of The Force Awakens. Probably because I've seen it a million times since 1977.
I don't think the force awakens is a better film than STB. It was good but seriously lacking any originality, a criticism I can't level at STB as much. I prefered the visuals in Beyond more too.
Pop quiz, no googling: do you remember the name of the star system that gets destroyed by the First Order?
Extra credit: what was the name of the planet that Finn and Rey on when that took place?
"Every detail" indeedAlderaan.
Millennium Falcon.
"Every detail" indeed
Did you even read my original post? 
I read it just fine. It was your (third) snarky attempt to imply that the two films were basically identical in every substantive way.
Just to be clear, though: "The Force Awakens" was released in 2015, not 1977. So You're probably thinking of "A New Hope" or just "Star Wars ___" as it was known when it first released. In fact, you're DEFINITELY thinking of the older film, since you seem to have only the most basic idea of what "Force Awakens" was even about and weren't paying close enough attention to it to distinguish it from any other movie you've ever seen.
I suspect this might be why you also imply that the Star Trek films using the TOS characters all tried to copy "Wrath of Khan" despite none of those films being even remotely similar to it. EVERYTHING is similar if you deliberately ignore all of the reasons why they're not.
Star Wars TFA was made from a Star Wars template; it didn't turn SW on it's head, it was a conservative evolution of Lucas' original model. Disney went with that because the prequels were iffy and the original template was a tried and tested formula that worked. And there's nothing wrong with that per say. NuTrek was a bigger departure but it certainly incorporated aspects of TWOK during its key moments in ID presumably in a hamfisted effort to delight the traditional fan. Only this time it was Spock that gave the Kahn yell and Kirk was the guy that died temporarily. NuTrek was constantly looking over its shoulders at the fan like this whilst it sprinted in its new direction. TWOK haunts movie-Trek like TBOBW haunts other aspects of "the Trek Empire" for want of a better term.
I don't think it will put it on par with Star Wars, nor is that my goal. I don't think Star Trek needs to be like Star Wars to be successful. But, I think Star Trek needs to do more to expand its brand to a younger audience.
From personal experience, my daughters already have a basic idea of what Star Wars is without having seen the films ("too scary" as my four year old said) due to Lego, figures, and the like. In contrast, Star Trek lacks that hook for a younger audience to broker familiarity and connect the generations.
There are other ways, but one certainly can see the appeal of connecting with younger audiences, even on a basic level. Again, "The Walking Dead" and "Game of Thrones" are good examples.
Star Wars will likely always have mass appeal but Star Trek doesn't have to be relegated to second fiddle or Star Wars' bread crumbs. As you say, it needs a message or story that resonates with people. I think the overall optimism of Trek can work very well in a contemporary audience. Which, as odd as it sounds, Discovery might be able to tap in to with being just before TOS' time.
ETA: I think the one thing Star Trek needs right now is consistency to keep in in the news cycle. The four year gap (more or less) with less tie in material and fragments of news do it no favors. In this case "no news is bad news" because much of the time, the news comes across as a sign of a troubled production resulting in negative word of mouth.
Hopefully Discovery will give a new face and voice to the franchise and break the negative news cycle.
Last edited:
Only my third attempt? I'm so far behind? You'll have to excuse me. It's because of the holidays and all! Anyway here's my fourth snarky attempt to imply that TFA is a shot-by-shot copy of ANH.
WTF? WHEN did I do that??? Find one post FROM ME where I imply that!!! I've never said it and I've never implied it because I surely don't believe it.
Unless you're thinking of a different member's posts. In which case… EVERYONE is similar if you deliberately ignore all of the reasons why they're not.
Last edited:
STID is a better movie than the winter solider.
winter solider was so derivate and straight forward in story telling, its disappointing.
STID was an amazing action film but a weak star trek movie.
Shot for shot? Maybe. Character for character? No, and certainly doesn't end the same way,Only my third attempt? I'm so far behind? You'll have to excuse me. It's because of the holidays and all! Anyway here's my fourth snarky attempt to imply that TFA is a shot-by-shot copy of ANH.
But, it looks pretty on YouTube.
Similar threads
