Why no DS9, Voy, or even Enterprise movie.

Understandable. I sure as hell wouldn't fork up 60 million based on those figures.

No one new was coming to the party. DS9 and VOY road on the coat tails of TNG. By the time ENT debuted, the goodwill was already at critical.

 

Jesus, it's like a heart beat going into flat-line.



I could have maybe gone for an Enterprise movie that ignored the stupid finale. Have Frakes or Burton direct, make it about the penultimate battle of the Earth-Romulan war and fleshing out the formation of the Federation, shoot a lot of it on the standing Enterprise sets. (This would be in an alternate reality where they weren't brutally, and immediately taking a fire axe to everything Star Trek at the end of season 4.). You could probably make that film for a 20-30 million dollar budget since you're using a lot of existing sets, props, wardrobe.

 

^^Problem is, I doubt anyone other than the two million who stayed with Enterprise until the bitter end would bother seeing that movie.

 

``But Archer finally reveals how the gazelle turned out!''

 

I agree they could have made movies of all the franchises pretty cheaply, using the standing sets. Hell, look how beautiful the TNG sets were made to look in GEN. Obviously such movies would not have done much business in the theatre, but I think fans would have been happy to buy the home release.
In a way, the answer to the thread question is that there was (is?) an insurmountable prejudice against straight-to-video movies.

 

Debateable. The reason why the Enterprise D looks like no one turned any lights on is because the sets from the series wouldn't hold up on the theatre screen so they were darkened. In fact, even the sets from DS9 and Voyager that got reused in First Contact and Insurrection were darkened.

Just how well to direct to video movies do, anyway? Both Stargate and BSG have tried that option but only made a few of them before giving up. Although, I agree, direct to video movies would be a great option to Trek that wouldn't have the mass appeal needed for a theatrical release. Or in other words, Pure Trek for the True Fans.

 

But not an anomalous opinion. I've seen a lot of other people say the same thing.

 

Besides,

Even if EVERYONE who watched Enterprise went to see the movie it would've made 40 million. Total. That's not even a respectable action-oriented opening weekend these days. I don't think many more people would've been attracted to it.

That would've killed Star Trek for a decade, if not longer.

 

Never missed it on Saturday mornings, actually.

 

We already know

Then was brought down by a lion.

 

Circle of life (and very "Simpsonsesque").

 

Judging by the fan art at deviantART, and mentions of TNG by Seth McFarlane, I'd say that the TNG cast is quite well-known.

 

If you look at the TNG films - from 'Generations' to 'Nemesis' there was a steady decline in box-office earnings. The only TNG film to really fire on all cylinders was 'First Contact.' I'm actually very happy none of the other series went to the big screen, and in retrospect even though I enjoy the TNG films, they really could have stopped at 'First Contact,' or at least gone from 'FC' straight to a better version of 'Nemesis.'

I have always believed and I will always believe that Star Trek is a concept that works best on television. The feature films are great fun, but they can never be what the series are because of time constraint. A feature film can't just appeal to hardcore Trek fans; to make money it has to have mass audience appeal. It has to draw in as many non-fans or casual fans as possible.

DS9 has become, over the years, my favorite Trek series in terms of character development and storytelling. Yet I would never want to see them try to put it on the big screen.

 

It doesn't help that everyone has aged 16 years.

 

For what it's worth I have the two Stargate direct to DVD films and they're excellent. I have no idea how profitable they were though.
I'd love to see more Trek done that way. Animated movies would work well and make ageist concerns less important.
I'm a little surprised that they haven't done a new Trek tie in tv series, that model has worked fairly well for the Marvel Universe movies with Agents of SHIELD and Sharon Carter.

 

I broached that subject of direct-to-DVD animated movies myself (c.f. Marvel and DC Comic's respective animated movies) and I was told by somebody else here that they won't work due to the DC & Marvel Comics animated direct-to-DVD movies not being profitable gradually over time (and sadly, I think the same happened with the Stargate ones.)

As mentioned here before, Star Trek isn't interesting enough for CBS (or profitable) to do a new series on any of the CBS-owned outlets.

 

You can join up 3 part episodes to make like a 2 hour movie.

 

^ Have anyone done that?

(I mean, apart from those TNG eps.)

 

"The Emissary" was basically a two-hour TV movie when it first aired. It is basically presented that way in the DVD release too. IIRC, Caretaker and Encounter at Farpoint were done the same way: a two-hour season premier that was basically a made-for-TV movie.