The Borg attack from FC was mentioned in an episode of DS9 around the same time as the movie came out but no mention of the Defiant being involved.
Why no DS9, Voy, or even Enterprise movie.
- Thread starter Phoenicianknight
- Start date
The Borg attack from FC was mentioned in an episode of DS9 around the same time as the movie came out but no mention of the Defiant being involved.
Transmedia wasn't really a thing in the 90s, especially not to the extent that it is today. The movies and TV series were intentionally kept separate aside from a few continuity references and nods specifically because it was felt at the time to do more would scare away the audience.
Ironically, the most popular TNG movie is FC which does include stuff taken from the other shows (the Defiant being in the battle and the Enterprise having an EMH) though even those are sparse not relevant to the story overall.
The reason why DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise didn't get a movie is because viewers gave zero fucks about the shows when it ended.
Getting a studio to spend 50 million on a movie doesn't happen when you're pulling down at 4 share.
There's no artistic reason. There's no deeper meaning.
Zero fucks.
I do agree that it's not popular enough for a film version. However...
I say all of this with the caveat that the ratings system is notoriously flawed anyway. While TNG had outstanding numbers, a 4 is certainly not bad for a syndicated series (or a show on a fledgling network). And it's most definitely not "zero fucks." Less than TNG does not equal "poor" or "bad" or "zero fucks." It's not great, but it's not dismal. Consistently 2 and below is getting into bleak territory.
If someone approached me and said "we have an opportunity here with Star Trek to create a new series on television...What should we do?" If there wasn't already an awesome idea for something new, I would definitely reboot Voyager because it's a premise with so much untapped potential, and they could "trek" all day long but they could also go really dark and serial if they wanted to. DS9 is my favorite of the series, but it's hard to imagine how they would generate popular excitement about a reboot for it considering it's the least "trek"-like. TNG is just TOS revamped. And TOS is already in reboot-mode on the big screen. I'd want to go with something different yet familiar. I think rebooting Voyager would be welcome among most open-minded fans, and if executed well it could be successful in the same way as nuBSG.
Then take the PREMISE from Voyager and execute it smartly this time around. Alot of the poor execution that sandbagged Voyager actually came from its crappy characterization and cookie-cutter writing formulas.
And I for one thing Voyager has had enough attention for one decade and it would be better for everyone if we moved on.
I'd guess that almost every brainstorming session for a new Trek fill-in-the-blank probably ends with someone saying, "It's been done," or someone realizes the "new" idea they came up with is really derivative of something else.
The problem in trying to rekindle interest in Trek in any form (it seems now it's movies) was forgetting who started this whole messy path to becoming a franchise back in the early 1970s on TV sets across the nation in syndication.
It may not have been a move of genius by Abrams, but the answer of what to do going forward was brilliant in its simplicity and even logic. To 15 to 25 year-olds, Kirk and Spock are new. Take the iconic characters that started it all, and give them a fresh start with a more contemporary approach. Trust they can lure in fans like they did before, then go from there.
The problem in trying to rekindle interest in Trek in any form (it seems now it's movies) was forgetting who started this whole messy path to becoming a franchise back in the early 1970s on TV sets across the nation in syndication.
It may not have been a move of genius by Abrams, but the answer of what to do going forward was brilliant in its simplicity and even logic. To 15 to 25 year-olds, Kirk and Spock are new. Take the iconic characters that started it all, and give them a fresh start with a more contemporary approach. Trust they can lure in fans like they did before, then go from there.
That's exactly what I meant, Crazy.
Yeah, it aint gonna happen, but that's what I meant.
Meh, the single ship alone in unknown territory trope is done everywhere in sci-fi that at this point with every possible spin that I'm comfortable enough leaving Voyager just the way it is. If you feel disappointed by Voyager, go check out BSG or any one of many other tales. They all cover much the same ground, fractured crews, the arrival of evil sister ships, that actually rebooting Voyager seems redundant.
A
Amaris
Guest
It has all been explained by the time I'm posting, so I'll just say that DS9 on the big screen would have been sweet, but what we got is still awesome, and I still can't wait to see the next film.
I'd like to see Voyager rebooted as a movie, akin to the 1998 Lost in Space. Tell the whole story in 2 hours and fifteen minutes.
Well, following that logic the rebooting of TOS seems even more redundant, but I don't think it was necessarily a bad idea.
That's generally my thinking too, but that story is so ancient that it's practically archetypical and a retelling has a solid foundation to draw from (I mean it's basically "the Odyssey" in space).
OTOH, I had a thought a while ago that if somebody was going to do a Star Trek series based on the reboots, they should capitalize on the Enerprise's seemingly faster-than-expected warp drive and depict the "five year mission" as an attempt to circumnavigate the Milky Way galaxy. So instead of Odysseus, we get Magellan: the archetypical explorer. Storyline can be episodic (new part of the galaxy, whole new planet) or with recurring themes (busted warp drive, need to haggle with the Kilrathi for spare parts) or even recurring enemies (The Klingon expedition that's basically racing us around the galaxy; the Romulan ship that was specifically ordered to follow us and report back to the Empire what we're up to).
That was the premise that TNG abandoned. I think THAT could be redone, but I don't think any of the spinoff series could plausibly attempt it. Abrams Trek is ripe for the concept; if not, a TNG reboot could easily pull it off.
That's not a bad idea!
Change a few things, though. Make it a wormhole that drops them in the Delta Quadrand and replace the Caretaker with the Borg. In this case, Janeway has to enlist the help of the Kazon, the Talaxians and maybe one other species (roll the dice... the Voth maybe?) to help take down the Borg cube that who has been terrorizing this region of space for years. Janeway's only condition is that they let her use the transwarp conduit to get back home when it's all over.
Then have the plot twist that the Kazon and/or the Voth decide to destroy the conduit immediately to keep more Borg reinforcements from showing up, and Voyager has to run a gauntlet between both of their fleets and dive through the conduit before they blow it up.
Emerges in Earth orbit with half the ship on fire; falls out of the sky, plummets towards some major city (say, Chicago or London) only to be saved at the last minute when Enterprise swoops in and grabs them with a tractor beam (Patrick Stewart cameo!
)The end.
Agreed.
You don't want to see a movie reboot of the latter shows, that doesn't mean that anybody else doesn't (or wouldn't); you'd be surprised at the people who most likely love the latter series and want to see either the original casts on the big screen, or see a reboot of the later shows (Roxanne Biggs-Dawson has said that people loved her character of B'elanna Torres on VOY at every directing assignment she's had)-to me, that says more than 'nobody cares for those shows.' Maybe somebody does care, and will one day want to make a movie based on TNG/DS9/VOY.
Just sayin'.
Last edited:
What I want is irrelevant. As a Star Trek fan, the movies aren't made for me. They're made for people who wouldn't have seen a Star Trek movie in a million years. That's where the money is. A film about DS9, VOY and ENT isn't.
Again, "the people that loved Belanna Torres" make up a miniscule percentage of the people who would actually go see a movie with Belanna Torres in it.
The Powers That Be probably took one look at that graph, and decided to forget the whole thing.The reason why DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise didn't get a movie is because viewers gave zero fucks about the shows when it ended.
Getting a studio to spend 50 million on a movie doesn't happen when you're pulling down at 4 share.
There's no artistic reason. There's no deeper meaning.
Zero fucks.
Like I said, 'Just sayin''. No more or no less than that.
THIS.
Star Trek is supposed to be a fun, romp to the stars. It's a warm genre meant for weekly views from your living room. Viewers expectations are different: they expect Star Wars level action, edgy dialogue, but humorous and all this should provide clever scifi ideas a wide audience can understand and appreciate: these are very challenging parameters for success.
... which has been accomplished with the last two films. Therefore, Paramount chose Kirk, et.al. wisely for their theatrical comeback.
Similar threads
