MovieChat Forums > Star Trek Beyond (2016) Discussion > Maybe it's time for Trek to just die on ...

Maybe it's time for Trek to just die on the big screen

posted 8 years ago by danzeisen
37 replies | jump to latest

Star Trek, for me, has always been space action viewed through the back drop of the relationship of the close knit characters. For the first time in the history of the franchise I found the characters so one dimensional that they didn't really have much at all to do with the characters we grew to love and actually care about in previous movies.
My suggestion is this- maybe it's time to just kill off the franchise rather than just let it flop around with nothing new to say and become a cynical ploy to pull in some bucks from the Trekkies.

[–] larosat 8 years ago

Wrong. Wonderful interactions between the characters if somewhat limited.

[–] karawolf-24794 8 years ago

*sigh* The only reason to "kill a franchise" is when it loses money, not when pretentious critic wannabes thinkle they should

[–] karawolf-24794 8 years ago

Thinkle = think

[–] simonpcpearson 8 years ago

Then its time to kill the franchise because Beyond flopped

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TrevorAclea 8 years ago

In which case stick a fork in it, it's done. It failed to double its budget in theaters, failed to gross as much as the 09 film (even worse, adjusting for inflation and 3D premium pricing it only sold half as many tickets Stateside), is the second most expensive of the reboots after going $35m over budget, and saw a 25% drop in business from the previous film to become the lowest grossing of the reboots and, along with the franchise-killing Nemesis, the only Trek film to flop theatrically. It also got the weakest reviews from the professional critics and the lowest user ratings on sites like this of the reboots.

"Security - release the badgers."

[–] Pumba74 8 years ago

*sigh* The only reason to "kill a franchise" is when it loses money, not when pretentious critic wannabes thinkle they should

Well according to your own argument then its time to kill it because this movie definitely flopped. 

[–] ksauve2 8 years ago

What 'ruin' Star Trek on the big screen the first time is people not realizing what works as a TV show doesn't work as a movie. You get less fleshing out of characters. A two hour movie of them just having episodic adventures would be boring and wouldn't make a good movie.

[–] domester82 8 years ago

Star Trek always was , and is, primarily a television franchise. The movies, kind of like the Simpsons or X Files movies, are like an extension or celebration of that. I wouldn't mind the movie series being retired, at least for a while

[–] firebird65-983-531812 8 years ago

What 'ruin' Star Trek on the big screen the first time is people not realizing what works as a TV show doesn't work as a movie. You get less fleshing out of characters. A two hour movie of them just having episodic adventures would be boring and wouldn't make a good movie.

ksauve, you make a great point. Dead on accurate. And to add to that point, I think it's why so many people hate Star Trek 5 The Final Frontier yet it's my second favorite movie in the franchise. It's just like a TV episode. Which is what I want. Not what they're throwing out there now.

[–] directorscut 8 years ago

These is no reason these flicks should cost $185m.

If this had cost $100m then $340m would have been a very acceptable gross.

Cut the budget, cut the outlandish action scenes, concentrate on the characters which are what most people enjoy about these movies. And stop remaking WRATH OF KHAN.

Proud member of the Pro-film Anti-digital Society (PFADS).

[–] artdogg50 8 years ago

I agree with everything Directorscut said. The 3 films together have grossed over 1 billion dollars. Nothing wrong with that take minus the huge excesses and huge set pieces. There has to be a happy-medium between the TV shows and big spectacles. Fact is, Star Trek started on small budgets and most of the true successes have come from small or more modest budgets. I do now think Star Trek is better suited for television, but admit Star Trek has always been somewhat of a tough sell. This franchise will never pull: Star Wars, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Hobbit, Dark Knight, or Avengers numbers. If they can manage to pull the same kind of numbers on more modest budgets, they'll be able to make feature films as often as they like. They're gonna have some big decisions to make like they did in the early 80's though.

[–] cabbageboy316 8 years ago

I think a Trek film could if they would think outside the box and try something different. Go for a massive epic kind of feel. Try a different cast of characters on the big screen. Do a massive scale LOTR style plot with something like the Borg trying to attack/assimilate DS9, use that crew, bring in the Dominion on the side of the Federation, Klingons, Romulans, everyone under the sun. Just go all out with an intergalactic war with everything at stake, and perhaps sign a couple of big name stars.

[–] itsmytardis 8 years ago

I would NEVER watch that garbage if it was the DS9 or Enterprise crew. I absolutely hated both and I am quite literally a die hard Trek-fan. As to this movie, I loved it. I'm heartbroken that Anton Yelchin died because I thought he really fleshed out an otherwise intolerable character from TOS. There are parts of this movie I loved and parts I didn't. I could have honestly done without the immense scale of the weird wasp/bee-like ships, and I'm kind of sick of Idris Elba (mostly because what's made him BIG was Thor, etc and he *beep* on them like it was ruining his career).

However, that being said, I hated the whole Dominion arc/thing in DS9. It was awful. The characters in the show were worse. And what makes matters worse, is the shows been over for a long time and they're all pretty damn old now, I'd like to see them tumbling around and getting into fights like those on the shows and the previous movies.

For *beep* sake man, Dax is 53, Sisco is gods d@mn near 70, Kira is a year from 60, Odo is nearing 80, Quark is 67 and while he still does a lot of acting almost 70 is pretty old to be getting into fisticuffs, O'Brian is 63 and as much as I love him his acting ability is.... eh at best, Jake Sisco is almost 40 but as far as I can tell aside from tiny appearances he doesn't act anymore, And okay, Worf is almost 70, but that SOB is in amazing health and from what I have heard, is the captain of a ship on an incoming Star Trek show.

Stop circle jerking and being a DS9 fanboy, seriously. The odds of a DS9 movie being made is about as likely to be made as a feature length film about Nog de-hairing his nose.

The other issue with "intergalactic war" would be the whole... CGI which is what REALLY REALLY knocks up the budget of a movie.

To quote a great character with a poofy fro and sick dancing skills -

Idiot.

[–] fctiger 8 years ago

In your really bizarre rant you missed the part where the poster was simply talking about bringing the characters back and not the actors who played them the first time. He was saying do it like you did these films fill the roles with younger up and coming actors.

I dont think they would ever make a DS9 film but he was simply saying reboot it again which I dont think would work. DS9 was amazing, turning it into a film would be fun with a huge plot but it would lose a lot of what that show made special by turning it into another hype CGI fest too. But I would love to see the station on the big screen.

So take it down a notch chief. The only idiot here is the one with bad reading comprehension skills.

[–] TMGatIMDB 8 years ago

''Cut the budget, cut the outlandish action scenes'' you say, that would turn star trek into a boring drama and I for one had enough of it with DS9.
I've liked most of S.T. as its adventure, I'm sure there are many people tha same.
If you want even more drama watch csi, theres loads of them.

[–] fctiger 8 years ago

Huh? DS9 had the most action scenes out of any of the shows. It had a 5 year war arc and from season 4 on it was tons of action on that show. The difference is it wasn't just action for action sakes and why it was good.

And the reality is if they make another film the budget will HAVE to be cut. It doesnt mean less action just less spectacle. You can still have lots of fight scenes and whiz bang action it just can't all be crazy CGI explosions everywhere.

[–] chiaro_di_luna 8 years ago

Yeah, it seemed so tired this time around. I found myself bored, never thought I'd feel that way.

It's not always being fast or even accurate that counts. It's being willing.

[–] mayflowers8 8 years ago

I think they should do at least one more with this great ensemble cast led by Chris Pine and just make it as epic storywise as can be. They will still need to reduce the budget for sure if they make a 4th one. I also felt the marketing was really lacking this time, especially for a 50th Anniversary Star Trek movie. Overall though, Star Trek Beyond was just not as entertaining as the first two, and I think it's mainly because JJ Abrams left the franchise to do Star Wars. I say bring back JJ Abrams to direct the final movie in this universe if they can.

[–] jimlacy2003 8 years ago

Exactly. My feelings too after just watching this.
At least I bought it for rent, not a full ticket price.

They took what was an intelligent thinking persons show and dulled it down to a submoronic mass appeal level.

Poor Gene, look what they did with your legacy..

[–] persen1 8 years ago

Its just time to knock it up a notch. Its not the first time that a Trek movie did poorly, just look at the movies with Shatner and Nimoy.
You had 4 movies who did pretty good, then you got that 5th movie who did not do to well, then they knocked it up a notch and created the 6th movie and got a movie which by most is considered to be the best one of all the 6 movies.

If they play the cards right and put together a just as good story with a descent amount of action, then they can pull it off and create a Trek movie which will be memorable and find its way in to the hearts of people.
The goal could also be intergalactic peace with the 4th movie, if not with the Klingons to avoid ripping off The Underscovered Country, then perhaps with the Romulans by saving the life of a high ranking member of the Romulan Senate.

[–] syafiqjabar 8 years ago

Gene ruined his own legacy by messing up season 3. Also your complaint is just a repeat of criticisms directed at Wrath of Khan.

[–] BillyBeefcake 8 years ago

OP

I thoroughly enjoyed all three of the rebooted Star Trek movies.

You are part of a small vocal minority.