Why wasn't there ever a ds9 movie?

[Nightdiamond]

Yep, it's too late now. If anything, perhaps they should have waited a while to do the last two T.N.G movies instead of releasing one after the other.

Assuming the plot and writing and story were entirely, entirely different.

I still think if they released a DS9 movie involving the Dominion during the time it was aired (assuming the writing was good) it would have been successful. I think the viewers, both casual and specific would have wanted to see something like that.

It's no coincidence, in my opinion, that of all the T.N.G movies, the one that was praised the most and was successful was the one featuring the Borg battle, and incidently, the Defiant fighting in it.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

The largest reason seems to have been the conflict between Rick Berman & Ira Behr. I gather that the cast was all contracted in case a film was made; but the minute WYLB was wrapped, Paramount could rip the stages down fast enough. It didn't help, of course, that DS9 had the reputation of being the best show no-one ever saw; & that even the TNG films were struggling in a multiplex environment dominated by dumb films with unlikable stars

Berman at best treated DS9 with benign neglect. I think it was Behr who said once in an interview that he was personally told by King B that "you will NEVER be the 'torchbearer' for Trek."

Looking at the show from King B's perspective, it broke all of his rules: 1) it had characters in conflict WITHIN the primary cast 2) things that happenedin one episode MATTERED in future episodes 3) it wasn't afraid to portray the characters as less than "perfect people".

 

[darkwing_duck1]

i just found something on the memory alpha wiki that explains a lot:

"Whereas both the previous live-action television series had open endings that allowed for continuation into motion picture format, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine ended quite firmly and conclusively, with all its various plot lines resolved and the departure of various main characters. Any subsequent film would therefore have required a significantly different premise and different casting, departing radically from the series' format which had been so familiar to its fan base. On the possibility of a Star Trek: Deep Space Ninefilm ever happening, Ira Steven Behr commented: 'I don't think so. I think we could do a pretty kick-ass Deep Space Nine movie, but not even in my wildest imaginations do I consider it'. He also commented 'The only Trek I think about is Deep Space Nine, to be honest. If they did a Deep Space Nine film, I certainly would like to be involved if that ever happened, which I doubt'."

there's more here.

That "definite close" was forced on them by King B.

The original plan was for the Federation Alliance to LOSE the war, setting up for a new series.

 

[RandyS]

I wouldn't say that Voyager killed DS9... I think syndication killed DS9. In my local area (Chicago, in case you were curious) DS9 was aired on WPWR ch. 50 (cable channel 8). It started as a Thursday program at like 7 pm... that last about a season... then they moved it to Friday nights at like 8... again, about a season (and I was still watching it!). Then they moved it to like Saturday at 10 pm, which is about when I stopped watching. Finally, they put the nail in the coffin around season 5, and stuck it at like 3 am on Sunday's. Keep in mind this before DVR's and TiVo existed... I used to set my VCR to record them, but I just stopped watching.

It's interesting to hear that. Mine must be the only area where DS9 stayed more or less in the same timeslot. For over a decade our local FOX station KTXL 40 (Like you, also cable channel 8), showed the first three Star Trek shows on Saturdays at 7pm. From 1985-1987 it was TOS. From 1987-1994 it was TNG (The entire run of that show), and since DS9 originally overlapped with TNG, it was shown for it's first two seasons on Sundays at 6pm. Then when TNG ended, DS9 took over the Saturday at 7pm slot in 1994-1995, but in 1995-1996, returned to Sundays at 6pm and stayed there for the rest of it's run.

 

[Disillusioned]

If they made a movie, I would simply hope Ira Behr and the other DS9 producers would be on it rather than B&B or JJ Abrams, or any other big name producer/director for that matter.

 

[robtclements]

If they made a movie, I would simply hope Ira Behr and the other DS9 producers would be on it rather than B&B or JJ Abrams, or any other big name producer/director for that matter.

Well, B&B are out the door & the idea of the Lost, in space-trek man even considering material which requires a plot & characterisation seems unlikely. I doubt a proper DS9 project (defined as you do, requiring the Behr writing team as well as the key actors to be involved) will ever emerge from the mindnumb that it is corporate USAmerica; but with the plethora of marketing options now available, one can't completely count it out

 

[RandyS]

If they made a movie, I would simply hope Ira Behr and the other DS9 producers would be on it rather than B&B or JJ Abrams, or any other big name producer/director for that matter.

I agree with you on Behr, but as for the others involved, I hope that after what he did to Battlestar Galactica, Ron Moore never goes near Star Trek again.

 

[Broccoli]

A DS9 movie is a terrible idea. Look, I loved DS9 when it was on. Excellent writing, good characterization, a great show all around (even if it did have its fair share of clunkers - what show doesn't?).

However, given the amount of backstory that DS9 has, especially in regards to the wormhole, the Bajorans, Sisko's relation to them, etc, it would be very difficult for the average movie goer to go to the movie and not be incredibly confused at what was going on.

And if they did water it down to make it just a "problem of the week" type movie (like the TNG films), I suspect we Trek fans would be disappointed that it didn't play into DS9's mythology.

Also, I am glad that TNG didn't use the Dominion in Insurrection. Could they have had a Dominion plot line? Sure! But, you know what, it would feel really strange and out of place. It would be like the Borg becoming a major villain on DS9. Also, I think it would be treading on DS9's territory a little bit.

I suspect that Ira Behr would be fuming if the Dominion were used at villains in Insurrection. Judging from past interviews and his general reaction towards things that he isn't involved with, he comes off as if he has a high opinion of himself. I mean, I like his work, but he just strikes me as a little too high and mighty.

i just found something on the memory alpha wiki that explains a lot:

"Whereas both the previous live-action television series had open endings that allowed for continuation into motion picture format, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine ended quite firmly and conclusively, with all its various plot lines resolved and the departure of various main characters. Any subsequent film would therefore have required a significantly different premise and different casting, departing radically from the series' format which had been so familiar to its fan base. On the possibility of a Star Trek: Deep Space Ninefilm ever happening, Ira Steven Behr commented: 'I don't think so. I think we could do a pretty kick-ass Deep Space Nine movie, but not even in my wildest imaginations do I consider it'. He also commented 'The only Trek I think about is Deep Space Nine, to be honest. If they did a Deep Space Nine film, I certainly would like to be involved if that ever happened, which I doubt'."

there's more here.

That "definite close" was forced on them by King B.

The original plan was for the Federation Alliance to LOSE the war, setting up for a new series.

....and can you provide a link for that, (especially for the part where they wanted to set up a new series)? I know that they tossed the idea around for the Feds to lose, but from all indication, it was never seriously considered.

 

[Disillusioned]

I think part of the problem is that far too many people underestimate the "average moviegoer". If publications like Entertainment Weekly can gush about DS9, then that says something right there (I just wish I could remember the issue). As for sticking to the mythology and backstory of the show, that's where having the right person in charge and the right people writing will make a difference. Someone like Ira Behr would undoubtedly jump right back in where they left off, whereas someone else might pull a JJ and just ignore everything that didn't suit them.

 

[Nightdiamond]

I think part of the problem is that far too many people underestimate the "average moviegoer". If publications like Entertainment Weekly can gush about DS9, then that says something right there (I just wish I could remember the issue). As for sticking to the mythology and backstory of the show, that's where having the right person in charge and the right people writing will make a difference. Someone like Ira Behr would undoubtedly jump right back in where they left off, whereas someone else might pull a JJ and just ignore everything that didn't suit them.

Bingo! Maybe too much audience tracking and assumptions took over. It was these types of assumptions that lead to the idea that T.N.G movies would be best.

It went against the tracking, the quite scientific approach the studios use to determine how a film is going to do. The film did nowhere near as well as the tracking results had predicted.

"I still believe that Nemesis was a very good film and I, to this day, don't quite understand what went wrong."

The idea seemed to be T.N.G was more mainstream and the average movie goer was more interested in T.N.G and it's crew, and would not understand any other version of Star Trek.

The end result was overestimating the audience desire for Trek by ignoring storylines and writing.

To be fair for DS9 fans, one way to look at it is, DS9 fans would be interested in T.N.G movie as long as it were truly good and interesting, and would support it.

So why wouldn't a T.N.G fan be just as interested in a DS9 movie as long as it had good writing and plotlines too?

 

[happydave]

As for the idea on reuiniting the characters.

If you think about it, the only few characters missing are: Worf, O'Brien & Odo.

Sisko is nearby just not a person.

Kira, Jake, Quark, Bashir, Dax are all on the station.

O'Brien I'd expect would revisit his best friend from time to time, so it's no stretch to get him there. Worf & Garak are leaders of their races so would be involved with Human Federation diplomacy.

So make some kind of story involving The Founders and we have an Odo return.

I don't really see it as difficult to stitch together a decent enough plot involving the entire cast.

Odo's rejoining of the link mellows the Founders
The Founders lose their grip amongst the Vorta
The Vorta with the Jem'Hadar make a run for control over the Founders & subsequently the Gamma Quadrant & Alpha Quadrant

If you want you can draw parallels to the history of Germany with the Treaty of Versailles and the Dominion & the Treaty of Bajor. Both had armies which were still not completely weakened and were essentially forced to comply with demands.

Considering how the Dominion War was ended there has to be a lot of unhappy/confused Vorta / JemHadar.

We also have a Weyoun going against the Dominion in 'Tretchery, Faith & The Great River' so it's not without thought that another Weyoun takes control over the Gamma Quadrant and makes another run at the Alpha Quadrant.

So we end up with Odo coming to warn us, & the Klingons, Cardassians taking arms in the Second Dominion War in which we can basically parallel WWII.

I see that as a clever enough framework (of course a lot of story's strength is due to smaller details) which does tie all the main characters back into the plot and still keep fairly true to DS9 canon.

Though that's completely ignoring sets, actor availability and everything. And doing a complete war movie in 2 hours is difficult enough.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

A DS9 movie is a terrible idea. Look, I loved DS9 when it was on. Excellent writing, good characterization, a great show all around (even if it did have its fair share of clunkers - what show doesn't?).

However, given the amount of backstory that DS9 has, especially in regards to the wormhole, the Bajorans, Sisko's relation to them, etc, it would be very difficult for the average movie goer to go to the movie and not be incredibly confused at what was going on.

And if they did water it down to make it just a "problem of the week" type movie (like the TNG films), I suspect we Trek fans would be disappointed that it didn't play into DS9's mythology.

Also, I am glad that TNG didn't use the Dominion in Insurrection. Could they have had a Dominion plot line? Sure! But, you know what, it would feel really strange and out of place. It would be like the Borg becoming a major villain on DS9. Also, I think it would be treading on DS9's territory a little bit.

I suspect that Ira Behr would be fuming if the Dominion were used at villains in Insurrection. Judging from past interviews and his general reaction towards things that he isn't involved with, he comes off as if he has a high opinion of himself. I mean, I like his work, but he just strikes me as a little too high and mighty.

i just found something on the memory alpha wiki that explains a lot:

"Whereas both the previous live-action television series had open endings that allowed for continuation into motion picture format, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine ended quite firmly and conclusively, with all its various plot lines resolved and the departure of various main characters. Any subsequent film would therefore have required a significantly different premise and different casting, departing radically from the series' format which had been so familiar to its fan base. On the possibility of a Star Trek: Deep Space Ninefilm ever happening, Ira Steven Behr commented: 'I don't think so. I think we could do a pretty kick-ass Deep Space Nine movie, but not even in my wildest imaginations do I consider it'. He also commented 'The only Trek I think about is Deep Space Nine, to be honest. If they did a Deep Space Nine film, I certainly would like to be involved if that ever happened, which I doubt'."

there's more here.

That "definite close" was forced on them by King B.

The original plan was for the Federation Alliance to LOSE the war, setting up for a new series.

....and can you provide a link for that, (especially for the part where they wanted to set up a new series)? I know that they tossed the idea around for the Feds to lose, but from all indication, it was never seriously considered.

A link? Not off the top of my head, but I can provide the SOURCE. It was an interview in one of the last issues of Star Trek: The Magazine.

 

[Broccoli]

A link? Not off the top of my head, but I can provide the SOURCE. It was an interview in one of the last issues of Star Trek: The Magazine.

I guess I have a hard time believing they wanted to set up a new series considering the DVD special features and the DS9 companion suggest otherwise (and the DS9 companion is very frank and open about nearly everything).

Also, that would be very presumptuous for ISB & his writers to purposely set up a new series before one is even green lit. The only people at that time that could begin a new series would be the suits at Paramount. At that time, a fifth series wasn't a thought in anyone's eye.

 

[JoeD80]

Also, that would be very presumptuous for ISB & his writers to purposely set up a new series before one is even green lit. The only people at that time that could begin a new series would be the suits at Paramount. At that time, a fifth series wasn't a thought in anyone's eye.

There's no problem with a writer laying seeds in his current show to set up a possible spin-off before a "go" order; just as long as they are prepared for a no-go.

 

[Broccoli]

It is one thing to set seeds like the DS9 episode with the Maquis. What darkwing is suggesting that ISB wanted to do is entirely different. Having DS9 end with the Feds defeated in the war (and presumably the Dominion planting their flag in the AQ) changes the whole playing level of the fictional universe. If they wanted to do another 24th century series, it would be forced to deal with that, in addition to the TNG movies being forced to deal with it and, in a way, VGR forced to deal with it.

 

[Disillusioned]

Well, GR had some bad ideas, too; nobody is perfect. I have to give him kudos for wanting to do something outside of the status quo though.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

A link? Not off the top of my head, but I can provide the SOURCE. It was an interview in one of the last issues of Star Trek: The Magazine.

I guess I have a hard time believing they wanted to set up a new series considering the DVD special features and the DS9 companion suggest otherwise (and the DS9 companion is very frank and open about nearly everything).

Also, that would be very presumptuous for ISB & his writers to purposely set up a new series before one is even green lit. The only people at that time that could begin a new series would be the suits at Paramount. At that time, a fifth series wasn't a thought in anyone's eye.

The way they presented it (this is from memory, since my mags are all packed away somewhere) was that they could either do a "new series" with a new cast, et al, OR they could bring the Voyager home and have it become the "core" of the reisistance (which would have revitalized that show).

Berman's response (from other interviews) was in essence "NO! It's over, you're done, and you're never going to be brought up again!"

 

[darkwing_duck1]

It is one thing to set seeds like the DS9 episode with the Maquis. What darkwing is suggesting that ISB wanted to do is entirely different. Having DS9 end with the Feds defeated in the war (and presumably the Dominion planting their flag in the AQ) changes the whole playing level of the fictional universe. If they wanted to do another 24th century series, it would be forced to deal with that, in addition to the TNG movies being forced to deal with it and, in a way, VGR forced to deal with it.

See above...

 

[Broccoli]

A link? Not off the top of my head, but I can provide the SOURCE. It was an interview in one of the last issues of Star Trek: The Magazine.

I guess I have a hard time believing they wanted to set up a new series considering the DVD special features and the DS9 companion suggest otherwise (and the DS9 companion is very frank and open about nearly everything).

Also, that would be very presumptuous for ISB & his writers to purposely set up a new series before one is even green lit. The only people at that time that could begin a new series would be the suits at Paramount. At that time, a fifth series wasn't a thought in anyone's eye.

The way they presented it (this is from memory, since my mags are all packed away somewhere) was that they could either do a "new series" with a new cast, et al, OR they could bring the Voyager home and have it become the "core" of the reisistance (which would have revitalized that show).

Berman's response (from other interviews) was in essence "NO! It's over, you're done, and you're never going to be brought up again!"

I'm sorry. I remain completely skeptical of the entire story (save for they once tossed around the idea of the Feds losing the war before abandoning it).

I've done a web search to find anything that backs up your claims (I don't have access to the ST Magazines) and I have found nothing.

If what you say is true, then that is horribly arrogant on ISB's part. Voyager, for better or worse, was not his show to run and for him to seriously pitch how Voyager writers should redirect their show is unprofessional. Berman was right to backhand him down, if all this happened. (Then again, I don't fully buy into the villious version of Rick Berman we get from people, fans and former writers alike).

 

[Hober Mallow]

Darkwing, your info is incorrect. From what I remember -- and we're talking about something I read probably ten years ago, so make what you will of it -- they did toy with the idea of the Federation losing the war, but something miraculous would happen at the last moment that would defeat the Dominion, or some such nonsense. I don't think there was ever any serious talk about ending the series with a triumphant Dominion, and this was definitely not planned on leading into another series.

Looking at the show from King B's perspective, it broke all of his rules: 1) it had characters in conflict WITHIN the primary cast 2) things that happenedin one episode MATTERED in future episodes 3) it wasn't afraid to portray the characters as less than "perfect people".

To be fair to Berman, Gene Roddenberry would have had serious problems with 1 and 3 as well.