Star Trek Beyond | 7.22.2016 | Not an Oscar winner.

[RobinHood26]

LET FRANKES DIRECT! Im soooo in. 

[The47th]

Slightly off topic, but I find hilarious that in an age when every major studio is desperately trying to build their own megafranchise with different inter-connected iterations, Paramount comes and dismantles the one they had been building over the last four decades, taking it back to a single crew and a single series of films.

 

Of course, they couldn't have possibly anticipated what the future would bring, but it's fascinating to see how wrong a business man can be.

 

No wonder why they are contemplating the idea of re-connecting the current films to the rest of the franchise (besides ENT) in the next movie.

[TServo2049]

Paramount really had no choice. Rick Berman and Brannon Braga had poisoned the Trek well in the early 2000s with Enterprise and Nemesis. The franchise was on life support, so rebooting the TOS era (which was still popular and basically untainted even after all I mentioned) must have made sense then.

Edited December 14, 2014 by TServo2049

[kitik]

Enterprise was finally getting good when they cancelled it. But they had lost too many fans after the first few seasons.

[kitik]

And then of course the final episode happened, which just happened to feature Frakes (though it wasn't directed by him), and destroyed Enterprise all over again.

[The47th]

I agree that the franchise was on life support and that they needed to make something radical, but most of ST 2009 would be intact if we take out the time-travel storyline. There are big gaps in the story of the original characters left by TOS, enough to fill them with a new series of movies without having to turn to the trick of rewriting the little story we already knew. We never saw how the crew came together, and we ony got to see a part of the 'five-year mission' the original series was based on, for example.

 

It's just a matter of perspective, I guess. The executives at the time thought that the best move was simplifying people's view of the series, making it clear that they didn't need to see any of the previous entries to fully appreciate the new material.

 

(Edit: that the name of this thread is 'STAR TREK III' and not 'STAR TREK XIII' says it all, really).

 

However, five years later, people have found the joy of discovering a myriad of crossed-storylines, spin offs and plotlines that cover numerous entries. So now the 'commercial' decision is to say people that if they have liked this, they have a lot more movies and TV shows to watch.

 

Enterprise was finally getting good when they cancelled it. But they had lost too many fans after the first few seasons.

 

The story was getting way better, and it was finally becoming the prequel series it was supposed to be, but reviewing the episodes you can tell the narrative was painfully outdated. They tried to reinvent the franchise (and the actual show on seasons 3 & 4) but most changes only applied to the aesthetics. It was understandable that Voyager carried on with that 90s path in its final seasons, but Enterprise should have been a very different show.

 

In fact, I'm of the opinion that Voyager should have introduced some bold changes to the formula, but they got away with it at the time. Seven years later, it was too late for Enterprise to perform the same trick.

 

Enterprise's final seasons aired at the same time that Battlestar Galactica's first steps, and by comparing both of them you can clearly see that BSG meant the future of science fiction on TV, and that Enterprise was the last product of an era that was coming to an overdue end.

Edited December 14, 2014 by The47th

[Klingo]

Enterprise was finally getting good when they cancelled it. But they had lost too many fans after the first few seasons.

Indeed, Enterprise was starting to be really good prior to that.  Course that final episode they had to rush it and not a good conclusion to the series.  Also Enterprise was going to be refitted to look like the Federation Constitution class. 

[Klingo]

I agree that the franchise was on life support and that they needed to make something radical, but most of ST 2009 would be intact if we take out the time-travel storyline. There are big gaps in the story of the original characters left by TOS, enough to fill them with a new series of movies without having to turn to the trick of rewriting the little story we already knew. We never saw how the crew came together, and we ony got to see a part of the 'five-year mission' the original series was based on, for example.

 

It's just a matter of perspective, I guess. The executives at the time thought that the best move was simplifying people's view of the series, making it clear that they didn't need to see any of the previous entries to fully appreciate the new material.

 

However, five years later, people have found the joy of discovering a myriad of crossed-storylines, spin offs and plotlines that cover numerous entries. So now the 'commercial' decision is to say people that if they have liked this, they have a lot more movies and TV shows to watch.

 

 

The story was getting way better, and it was finally becoming the prequel series it was supposed to be, but reviewing the episodes you can tell the narrative was painfully outdated. They tried to reinvent the franchise (and the actual show on seasons 3 & 4) but most changes only applied to the aesthetics. It was understandable that Voyager carried on with that 90s path in its final seasons, but Enterprise should have been a very different show.

 

In fact, I'm of the opinion that Voyager should have introduced some bold changes to the formula, but they got away with it at the time. Seven years later, it was too late for Enterprise to perform the same trick.

 

Enterprise's final seasons aired at the same time that Battlestar Galactica's first steps, and by comparing both of them you can clearly see that BSG meant the future of science fiction on TV, and that Enterprise was the last product of an era that was coming to an overdue end.

Voyager was saved by this...

[Klingo]

Since the timeline was already changed even in the first episode of Enterprise.  And their encounter of the Borg, they should have brought this one.

[The47th]

She could have saved two shows in a row.

[Jonwo]

The other problem is the Star Trek franchise is controlled by CBS so they have a TV series along side the films although with the 50th anniversary coming up, CBS should consider doing a TV series

[Klingo]

The other problem is the Star Trek franchise is controlled by CBS so they have a TV series along side the films although with the 50th anniversary coming up, CBS should consider doing a TV series

Being a Trekkie.  They should have a series in the future about 10 or 20 years after Voyager has come home.  Slipstream technology allowing ships to travel the galaxy in months instead of decades.  So a future ship with young crew traveling all parts of the galaxy.

[Jonwo]

Being a Trekkie. They should have a series in the future about 10 or 20 years after Voyager has come home. Slipstream technology allowing ships to travel the galaxy in months instead of decades. So a future ship with young crew traveling all parts of the galaxy.

Star Fleet academy is another they've considered in the past.

[Ruthie]

I would be happy with that. He did a good job with First Contact and Insurrection (however irrelevant the story of the latter might be). My biggest fear is that his style may be too classic for a series of films that are still fighting to reinvent and modernize the franchise.

 

But I would definitely be on board.

Well, you said everything I was going to say. So I'm not going to say what I was going to say.  Are you me in some weird time-space continuum bend?

[Klingo]

I would be happy with that. He did a good job with First Contact and Insurrection (however irrelevant the story of the latter might be). My biggest fear is that his style may be too classic for a series of films that are still fighting to reinvent and modernize the franchise.

 

But I would definitely be on board.

Classic as in too many space battles?

[Neo]

'Star Trek 3' Director Shortlist Includes Rupert Wyatt, Duncan Jones, and Morten Tyldum

Edited December 15, 2014 by Neo

[Neo]

Lin would be a great choice as would Wyatt. Actually all of them would be good picks.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Neo

[Jonwo]

Wyatt was on the previous shortlist along with Duncan Jones.

[Ethan Hunt]

Wyatt please.

[RobinHood26]

Wyatt out of those. 

 

Jones pulled himself out.