Shuttle Pod 25: Beyond Star Trek Beyond – What’s Next For The Kelvin Timeline and Discovery?

beyondbeyond

This week, the Shuttle Pod crew talk the future of our favorite franchise. Given Star Trek Beyond‘s performance at the box office, will there be a fourth Kelvin timeline film? Do Beyond‘s low box office numbers put more pressure on Star Trek: Discovery to keep the franchise afloat? And, what does the exit of fan favorite Bryan Fuller as show runner mean for the show’s future?

Subscribe to Shuttle Pod: The TrekMovie.com Podcast on iTunes, Google Play Music and Pocket Casts!

Despite it being widely hailed as “the best of the three” Kelvin timeline films, the box office returns for Star Trek Beyond have been less than stellar. Its worldwide gross of $338 million (with a production budget of $185 million) is the lowest of all three Kelvin films, and Beyond also experienced by far the largest second weekend drop.

Box Office Mojo data for all three Kelvin timeline Star Trek films

Box office numbers for all three Kelvin timeline Star Trek films. Data from Box Office Mojo

The Shuttle Pod crew discuss the future of both the film and television franchise. What does this suggest about the fate of a fourth Kelvin film, which J.J. Abrams was touting before Beyond even hit theaters?

With the bombshell dropped on fandom last week that show runner Bryan Fuller, who had overwhelming support amongst the Star Trek fan base, would be stepping back as head of the production and taking on a smaller role in Discovery, does this put even more pressure on CBS’s new Star Trek series to compete? Can Discovery keep Star Trek’s momentum and maybe even kick it up a notch? Or are we in for another Star Trek dark ages akin to the post-ENT years?

Sort by:   newest | oldest

they should call star trek genesis the fourth chapter of the star trek franchise if paramount will have a release date i may say like may 24 2019 same time as star wars episode 9 with the reveal title so continue with the fourth and fifth star trek movies series keep the enterprise a in star trek 4 genesis thank you

How about a continuing story about a Starfleet research station setup to inspect and observe a remnant wormhole tear that connects the two Star Trek alternate timelines?

The wormhole could be semi-unstable, and, from time to time, threats could emerge or voyages are taken into the past or future Star Trek.

So basically a twist on Deep Space Nice. Got it.

I thought that too, but it sounds like it would be way more Star Treky. : )

I don’t know if I agree with the idea of Frakes coming to direct ONLY because this is really something different in shooting style as you guys mentioned. It’s not that I don’t think Frakes could do it but I’d like to keep it fresh for a while at least. If that makes sense.

NO,No,No,no Frakes! Please! recall the abominable Thunderbirds movie.

Frakes didn’t write ‘Thunderbirds’, though, and the writing was by far the biggest problem.

Do you remember there being talk about the studio wanting to see a suspense thriller or Zero Dark Thirty style Trek story set in the Trek universe? I think that’s what you’ll see next. It’ll essentially be a side story to try to build up the fanbase again. They could tell a MACO story or something but I do think you’ll see a different story before getting a sequel to Beyond IF there ends up being a sequel.

The bottom line is that Star Trek movies should be smaller. There is not need for these outrageously high budgets. Star Trek doesn’t need it. It needs smaller and more intinamate.

Word. The best Trek movie ever made (TWOK, of course) is the one with the lowest budget.

Hey, Paramount… FIGURE IT OUT.

TUC imho is the best lol but yes…exactly!

With hammy actors quoting Shakespeare?

Hammy actors like Oscar, Emmy, Tony, and BAFTA-winner Christopher Plummer?

Hey, Hopkins goes ham sometimes too. ANYbody can go ham — bad ham — if they don’t get good direction, or have the clout to not have to listen.

kmart, you are so right.
And Plummer as General Chang was hamming it up, big time. I did love his perfect delivery of “Cry Havoc! and let loose the dogs of war” though.

There was just too much Shakespeare-robbing through the script. To me, that represents a writer trying too hard to look brilliant. JMHO.

@ David Moss and 21MM392:

That’s what I posted a few blog entries ago, and it was all but ignored. Adjusted for inflation, the budget of TWOK would be around $30 million today. Make THAT the absolute final budget for the next film and make them stick to it, even if it requires a total reboot of producers, writers, directors, studio, music, FX, even the cast. It can be done. Then nobody can claim afterward that the film lost any money. No excuses.

Completely agree. Every action, adventure, sci-fi and fantasy movie is following the same patter, the same cookie cutter shape, big budgets for big blockbuster effects. Now that was all fine back im the late 90’s and early 2000’s when these movies were coming out, because we had never seen such spectacle, but its just too much of the same. The uniqueness is gone because the intimacy and charm of smaller budget movies is gone in favour of every movie being grandiose like Transformers and Marvel movies. Its a shame. And not saying that Star Trek should be like it but Paramount and every other studio need to take a good hard look at Deadpool. When it can succeed so well with such a low budget, the other studios are doing something wrong. Deadpool stands apart from other superhero or antihero movies, its unique. There is no reason why Paramount can’t make a solid Star Trek movie lets say (I’ll be generous) for $100m.

The Chad, I think this is why many of us are finding SciFi on TV a little more satisfying these days.

Cripes, ALL those action movies seem to follow the same arc, make the same noise, use the same effects, and all the bombast comes to nothing.

Deadpool was funny as hell bc it turned action movies on their ear. But after the next 10 Deadpool imitations come along, I’ll get tired of that too.

No, Trek should not be Deadpool, but it is definitely misplaced in the blockbuster genre.

I like more “intinamate” movies too.

Completely agree. The spherical space station in Beyond was cool but completely unnecessary.

If you’re going to blow budget on something, though, at least blow it on Yorktown station, because that was feckin A cool. A science fiction wonder.

Watching STB again this week on DVD, I’m not as impressed as I was in a theater, but I still like it a lot more than ST09 and STID…a LOT more…mostly thanks to Jaylah/Sofia.

@ Marja:

I’m sorry, but I didn’t see much point in making Yorktown a snow-globey space station; I would have liked it more as a planet base, plus it would have saved the expense and hassle of going to Dubai. Would have been nice to see an old-school matte painting (as seen in TOS).

True. However, it takes more than a smaller budget to make a good Trek film. It takes the right team behind the camera.

3 Prime Universe settings I’d rather see than the random time period ‘STD'(!) is to be set in: (1) Post-Voyager/DS9/TNG with both new characters and old – plenty of jumping off points (post-Spock Prime’s disappearance for one thing/post-Hobus/Romulus destroyed) and scope for evolutionary re-imaginings without messing with past continuity. (2) Admiral Sulu mentoring an Enterprise B crew – because how awesome would that be? Plus Tuvok was around… (3) If nothing else, then even the Romulan War or fallout shortly after. Ah well. A man can dream.

Hell, even a cross-over series using the Temporal Cold War and featuring all of the above would be more fun…

Huh? Akiva Goldsman won the Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay for A Beautiful Mind. But in your view his credits are “nothing to write home about?” Wow.

John Logan was nominated for an oscar for having his name on the credits of THE AVIATOR but he last worked on the script someting like 7 years before the movie got made, so there’s a lot of doubt anything on screen belongs to him. WGA credits are a mess on a lot of films.

Hear that loud sucking sound? That’s his screenplay for “Lost in Space”

Aside from I am Legend, Lost in Space and Batman and Robin, it is widely believed that Goldsman in a producer capacity had a hand in rewriting Vince Gilligan’s script for Hancock. That may explain why the interesting first half of that movie degenerated into a farcical, contrived and generally frightful second. Like a sort of quasi-Deadpool becoming My Super Ex-Boyfriend.
As for John Logan-didn’t Ridley Scott fire him from script duties for Gladiator?

I think he just wrote the Commodus stuff, or at least that is all that survived of his in the final cut. Scott gets enamored of writers, then discards them a project or two later (Logan lucked in RKO 281 around that time.)

Star Trek Beyond was a fun movie. Paramount is solely to blame with its low box office performance. There was NO marketing for this movie. None.

There was some marketing, but it was so pitifully executed and sparse, this movie caught (I would say) MOST non-Trekkies completely by surprise.

This cant be true. Too many people here who have photos of Bob Orci hanging on their bathroom mirror repeatedly said how wonderful the marketing was. They must be correct.

Really, Beyond was dead in the water after they canned Orci. I hate to say it, but the only hope was going “Full Star Trek” (and Im sure some executive somewhere is saying ‘you never go full Star Trek’). After STID, they were screwed. Once Orci was canned and the feeling was the film was surrounded by disarray and confusion and would be a less Treky Star Trek, they were sunk.

All the media that covered the rumors of Shatner returning and then he didnt…it was like the studio had veered off course and was lost but instead of stopping to ask for directions, they kept driving deeper and deeper into the woods getting more and more hopelessly lost.

To get the current film franchise back on track, they need an EPIC 4th film but they will never pay for it now. Smaller, quieter films more in line with episodic story-of-the-week isnt going to cut it.

I agree with most of your post, but we did see shatner and the whole tos cast. That was Great!Thanks for the

My point was they needed something special to get people to pay attention to Beyond. When the leak of Shatner being in Orci’s story came out, it was major news all over. Major mainstream news outlets covered the possibility of Shatner’s return to Star Trek.

I always figured it was Bob;s last ditch attempt to keep himself from being canned – leak the Shatner connection and show the studio how much free PR they’d get. It didnt work. And Beyond was practically ignored.

Its the same premise behind JJ announcing Hemsworth was tied to a proposed 4th Trek…trying to generate buzz. The last card the studio can play to generate that sort of buzz is William Shatner. But the studio doesnt seem to like him.

Marketing wouldn’t matter so much if Par just had the good sense to keep the flippin’ budgets a LOT lower.

CofC, agreed.
Beyond was an excellent Trek film which got piss-poor marketing.

Definitely would NOT call STB an “excellent” film. The first in the reboot series, ST2009, was half-decent. The two thereafter…BAD!! STID was worse than STB, but not by much.

Forget STD, the fans want a sequel to NG/DS9/VOYAGER. And Kelvin timeline… Good God, let’s hope that’s dead for good.

I’m Re-watching Voyager right now, it’s not bad at all. Some episodes are way better than I remembered.

Can’t imagine wanting a sequel to BermanTrek, that’s as bad (DS9 excepted) in its own way as AbramsVille.

Mr. Berman produced some great Trek, including some of the most popular Trek ever such as Best of Both Worlds, Yesterday’s Enterprise, and The Inner Light. His main problem was that he hung around too long and let the same core of writers make all the decisions, which resulted in VOY and ENT episodes becoming very, very familiar. There’s nothing wrong with the universe Mr. Berman developed after Mr. Roddenberry left us. There are plenty of ways to start a new Trek (with non-burned-out writers, of course) 20-ish years after Nemesis.

No, I think Berman’s heavy hand is very evident practically from the start, with his ‘taste’ getting us those horrible flat dull music scores and ‘rules’ like no steadicam without special permission because the future is supposed to be fluid and smooth (and boring.) Season 3 works on TNG because I think they didn’t have time to REwrite everything down to a lowest common denominator and cut all the good stuff out, but that is the only season that feels right to me. Berman and Taylor I really think were very bad fits for TREK, and Braga to a degree as well.

“Forget STD, the fans want a sequel to NG/DS9/VOYAGER.”

…umm…no.

Yeah most fans want to ‘boldly go’ not YET another prequel series. I will give Discovery a chance (assuming its still coming) but Trek fans have to admit there hasn’t been really real excitement around it. The thing that seem to energize people was the fact it was in the prime universe and yeah Fuller was running the show. But oddly everything ABOUT the actual show seen and mentioned from that ugly ship to the premise of the show taking place in the TOS timeline again seems to be negative to mixed. I don’t know I want to like it but so far its all ho-hum for me. Hopefully once we get actual plot lines and in depth character profiles it will change.

Forget the E and make a USS Franklin film, w/small cast, minimize the FX, get a fresh producer-writer-director team, and make it for WELL under $100 million…like $50 m budget absolute tops. Stop being stupid about the way these films are budgeted. That said, STB was the best and clearly most entertaining of the “Nu” three, so make ’em more like that, just a hell of a lot cheaper. And for Gorn’s sake, keep Sofia Boutella in the core cast as Jaylah!

I’m with you on Jaylah (to replace Chekov) but kinda don’t think BR will continue given the studio situation. Agree about the rest too, except FRANKLIN, which is probably not spaceworthy after being half-drowned and harpooned (remember FRANKLIN is a REAL starship, built in space.)

Recast Chekov for 4. It’s not like they haven’t done it before.

Absolutely not, they should not recast Chekov. Anton’s memory should be honored. And many fans seemed to love Sofia Boutella, as did I. [I just hope for her sake that they can get the makeup time reduced]

@Marja:

We agree on this: NO recasting of Chekov! I told my wife last night that I feel to do so would be a slap in the face to Anton’s family, friends, and fans. And my wife agrees with me re: Jaylah, because my wife is tough like Jaylah, and has had to be for decades as an administrator in her chosen career. She’s my hero! And in these so-called “enlightened” times, she still has to put up with a-hole male co-workers trying to tell her what to do. I’d just love to watch my wife show them a thing or two, physically as well as verbally (*kick* and *pow*)! :D

Marja,

I get that Yelchin deserves to be honored.

He did good work on Trek but I find his other work, even such as TERMINATOR:SALVATION or even his CHARLIE BARTLETT, more readily comes to mind. Possibly because he had more to do?

Even if TREK is what others find, the epitome of his work, I’m not sure why honoring him for posterity falls to hanging up his role there? For me, sports metaphors don’t fit STAR TREK any better than upgrading the uniforms to jerseys.

As honors go, it seems doomed to be ephemeral at best. The next movie production company is not liable to hold to it, nor the TV production.

I personally find that what Anton brought to me in his career to be worthy of something more permanent than an empty chair in possibly one more movie: perhaps a star on the Walk of Fame, if it hasn’t already been done, or an upgrade to his headstone with the family’s approval of course?

“He’s dead Jim.”

JJ Abrams has already announced that there will be no recasting for the Chekov character. This is good.

kmart,

Re:remember FRANKLIN is a REAL starship, built in space.

Remember Franklin got beat up on a SPACE station and not a REAL planet. Unlike a planet the gravity can be adjusted to whatever is necessaary at the spot where it rests.

I’m saying that starships aren’t built with salt corrosion in mind except in the post KELVIN JJverse, so far as I know anyway. (presumably none of the ‘built at the base of a gravity well to calibrate it’ stuff that Orci and co offered up as pseudo-justification in place yet either, which for my money makes as much sense as, ‘must built the atomic device right above a major city because that is where it will be detonated.’)

They already explained how unlikely it was to get the ship off the ground in the first place, so add to that crashing through stuff like a Burt Reynolds movie and the submersion/impalement, and the age of the thing … c’mon, put the thing out of its misery. You can display it as a memorial right there in Yorktown, and even give tours.

You could retrieve a castrated ENTERPRISE nacelle or two and then hollow that out to use as a water slide right next to the FRANKLIN.

kmart,

I probably would have considered the crashing through things more relevant at the space station if they hadn’t already crashed through so many planetary features and remained spaceworthy in getting off the planet in the first place.

And to what end would a space station be running thousands of gallons of corrosive salt water through its plumbing when freshwater plumbing is far easier to maintain?

Besides, Jaylah needs some place to stay and it was her home. She’d probably have had the whole thing up and running while everyone was vacationing waiting for the NCC-1701-A to finish construction. Probably would make a good engineering dissertation for her at the academy.

Besides the Franklin would make a far better Captain’s yacht for Kirk than that Mudd flap.

If we’re talking JJverse plumbing, then I have to throw up my hands. In the first movie, they had tubes of water that has the h20 getting chopped up by nasty blades, how much sense is there for that?

Just curious, what makes you think Yorktown’s waterways are salt water?

But no, Franklin would be destined for the Starfleet museum.

Thorny,

They take a 200yo spaceship with none of their contemporary advanced tools or machinery at hand and make it flight and fight worthy with salvage parts. Take it into battle, defeat the bad guy, save the day with no shipboard deaths.

And now while it rests in a space station with far more superior repair resources, including environment, tools and an idling Enterprise Engineering department, it is considered “unsalvageable” just because it got a little dinged up in battle?

And slapping MUSEUM on it is no argument why it couldn’t or wouldn’t be restored to a flightworthy traveling one?

TVH took place with the Bird of Prey, so why can’t the next film use the Franklin in a similar fashion?

Time for BR to be cut loose.

I like your trend-of-thought, Vokar. The set-up could be something like the politics of Star Fleet Command turns against Kirk’s recklessness, and since he no longer has Pike as his mentor/protector, they transfer him to a much smaller, older ship to captain, while offering Spock command of Star Fleet’s flagship; a new Enterprise (he says no thanks, staying with Kirk). So Kirk’s mission is to seek out the as-yet-unexplored regions within Federation space (a “Lewis and Clark mapping out the new continent” sort of thing). He still discovers many things within the vastness of Federation Space, just stray a few light years off the main shipping lanes and inhabited member planets, finding things that perhaps don’t want to be found (the drama begins). Kirk will always manage to stick his nose in somewhere, where it’s not welcome (Section 31?, advanced Aliens studying us?, Romulan, or other covert ops?). Star Fleet grows annoyed with Kirk always sounding the alarm…so he decides he must go covert and “off-grid” himself to solve some problem, never letting on to Star Fleet there ever was a problem; “we’re just out here mapping and surveying, boring stuff”.

“Despite it being widely hailed as “the best of the three” Kelvin timeline films”

I honestly thought it was by far the worst of the three.

I couldn’t agree more. I’m a 56 year old guy from Lexington, KY who has followed Star Trek for 50 years. Beyond completely destroyed my love for this masterpiece.

He wrote ‘widely’, not ‘universally’.

100% agree. I’ve seen every Star Trek movie in the theater (beginning with TMP), except for Beyond — and I’m glad I waited. I just rented Beyond Tuesday night and it was so terribly, terribly disappointing. What an awful entry into the Star Trek universe. It is the first movie of this franchise that I need never see again (along with Nemesis and The Final Frontier).

Have to say I also agree. I much preferred the 2 JJ versions and only saw Beyond once on release. Yes the character interactions were much improved but the rest of the film I found to be very disappointing. A big “so what” is what I thought when the film ended and there was zero buzz from the audience when we all filed out which I think is clearly tied to there being little to no positive word of mouth from this movie. Way to average a movie going experience and say what you want about STID but I fear that the blandness of Beyond (e.g. the forgettable Krall) will be the end of this series.

Agree completely. The other’s felt like fresh new takes on the iconic original series…yes, even Into Darkness’ twisted, mash-up of Space Seed and Wrath of Khan seemed more fresh…and they lifted direct lines from Trek 2! lol, I don’t know, Beyond just felt so rushed and was more parody…trying too hard to hit those “signature” moments. It all felt a bit contrived to for my tastes..

Yes, without JJ it suffered. The 1st film in the Kelvin timeline is by far the best and also the best overall Trek film to date. It’s too bad Joss Whedon is too busy to take on the franchise.

They spend far too much on these films considering the relative depth of the niche. Trek has not been nor will ever be Star Wars in their appeal. Make them cheaper and give us a little less eye candy and a little more thought proviking and all will be well.

@James C, Bingo.

There won’t be a 4th BR Movie.

STB will most likely not make up its total deficit from home video and TV sales based on failure to recoup from box office alone, leaving it a write down situation even as they would likely go out to investors to finance a new film.
Paramount is in serious financial trouble from several years of dismal box office returns.
Viacom Stock has fallen almost 50% over the last two years.
The ATT/Warner merger prospect is only going to incentivize the CBS/Viacom merger.
CBS will clean house after the merger with Moonves as the de facto head of Paramount — first order of business to put Trek’s 4th movie on hold and stop the bleeding. Moonves will likely not renew BR’s first look deal to open the studio to other talent, and because the two have a contentious relationship, specifically divided over Trek.

My guess is Trek will get a reboot at Paramount once CBS takes over and it won’t be with Bad Robot.

We’ll see. Despite Beyond’s relative failure, it is still Paramount’s most successful movie of the past year.

Thorny you make a very, VERY good point there. That’s why I think there will be a sequel. That being said, if they end this as a BR trilogy, the ending of Beyond works as a ‘closing of the book’ type of ending. They’re all reinvigorated, Kirk is beaming and optimistic, they get a brand new ship and warp off into the sunset. That could very well be the end of the BR trilogy if they HAD to end it there.

Agreed. They could walk away at this point. Personally I hope the series continues. Sad that what began with such promise in 09 has withered to the state the film series is in today. There are a lot of learning points from STB which could be used to yield a much more successful movie if there is a next time.

True and Blu ray/on demand sales will boost the take meaning another film with the same cast is almost certain. Let’s hope they find the right director.

With ARRIVAL’s small budget and high critical praise, wouldn’t be surprised if IT turned out to be Par’s most profitable pic of the year (which is how I read and interpret ‘successful’, since profitability means considering expense vs return, a category that BEYOND unfortunately fails rather badly at making work.) I read someplace that ARRIVAL cost something like 40 mil or 50 mil (please correct me if that is wrong, it seemed low to me), so even if they drop another 40 on advertisting, you’re still looking at a movie that will break even before or around 200 mil worldwide, going by the general old 2.5 x multiplier rule.

Trek and Mission Impossible are, arguably, Paramount’s strongest franchises. They aren’t going to stop Trek. They may rework the budgets, but Pine and comapny…as Kirk and company…are, at this point, at aleast a somewhat “known” commodity. I think the studio will stick with that before they will wipe the slate clean and try a whole new approach. That would be even riskier business. I think Trek 4, along with some budget tweaks, will happen.

Jonboc,

Re :Pine and comapny [ sic ]

What you preach, isn’t the lesson one draws from Cruise and company in your MISSION IMPOSSIBLE simile. By the 4th one Cruise/Wagner Productions was gone with only two of the original cast returning.

Also, TRANSFORMERS is Paramount’s STRONGEST franchise. There’s no argument about it. All of 3 them are not owned by Paramount, as well.

Kayla — would you get behind a stand-alone Trek movie? That is, Trekverse (prime, please) but new characters? That seems to be what Doug Jung is hinting at; using unknowns would allow the studio to save a cargo bay full o cash. Or, they could do a retooling of ‘Strangers from the Sky’ with new casting (and a better ending, I hope; no magical creatures.)

I’m glad you mentioned ‘Dark Mirror’ in relation to the state of Trek. I’ve binged it and find most episodes worth recommending. I cannot, however, help but note that only one episode hs something like a ‘happy’ ending. That’s sad. Where’s the optimism? My real world concern is that we’ll soon implant our entertainments and go cradle to grave living vicarious rather than real lives. As fiction, cyber is incredibly dull. Doubt me? I dare you to reread all three Girl With The Dragon Tattoo books. At least 40% is devoted to explaining email and cell phones. Another third is about investigating banking fraud. The part we like is Lizbet getting beaucoip revenge in the real world. I don’t look forward to more books on the exciting chases through cyberspace and big internet crashes. Zzzzzz. I want Trek: optimistic, emotional, confrontational, BOLDLY GOING to strange new worlds.

Thus endeth the rant.

Make that Lisbeth. You can have that and my other typos gratis.

you really think it cost 185?

Well, they had to pay you!

Depressed after listening to that.
I enjoyed Beyond, but not really a 50th anniversary movie, should have been released on the anniversary date and all countries at the same timeish.

It really amazed and saddened me how LITTLE coverage Trek’s 50th got. And if the movie had come out on September 8th, worldwide, attention would have been paid!

That, and just publicize the movie, ferfecksake.

That was the figure bandied about in all the trades. You have any info you’d like to share? Does that figure include the development costs for your version of the film?

Well, it was $150 million going in but then they needed additional money from Alibaba to move forward.

China rakes in about 12% of your STAR TREK productions’ grosses so based on STID’s 56 million I guess it all boils down to whether it is reasonable that Alibaba invested $35 million anticipating even more from BEYOND’s returns?

What a helpful post by Bob. Hey Bob, if they have the figure wrong, why dont you correct them?

Whether is cost 185 or 150, the thing still was in the red. There’s also marketing and distribution costs, that we don’t know exactly how much of. If most movies only take half of domestic and a third of foreign box office, then Beyond only took in a total of about 140 mil. That does not even cover the first reported budget of 150 mil, let alone marketing.

Startrek: Tesseract of Pain

Borg show up looking for whoever created the black hole in startrek kelvin timeline.
Most of the crew is assimilated by the borg gods leaving uhura in the captains chair…and she beams aboard as many refugees as she can and runs for the Andromeda Galaxy.

You will never see a Star Trek film with that title.

Perhaps the draconian rules crushing the fan productions may had some influence on the fanbase, as it was a way of the studio showing it really don’t bother about the fanbase, just woried about money. I was influenced about it, and went to see the movie once. I couldn’t let thinking about it.
Also, a better release date (obviously) and a much more inteligent advertising, just the way Disney done on SW.

Not remotely. STID destroyed the hopes for Beyond before it ever happened. Orci being canned sealed the deal. Beyond had no hope of being successful.

The next Trek franchise needs to embrace what Star Trek is. It isnt Star Wars. It isnt STID. It also isnt STB.

I still can’t understand why people put so much stock in Fuller’s abilities and his plans for Discovery. What makes him so special? I would argue the opposite. I don’t want to see a gay character in Star Trek simply because we haven’t up til now. What reason is that? (other than pandering). It seemed to me his approach to creating a series was to make a list of all his perceived grievances with Star Trek and then craft a series around correcting them. “OK, this type of person was never represented…let’s plop one of them in. Gay guy…check. OK, the Captain has always been the main character, I’m tired of that….OK let’s make it the first officer. I love strong black women…oops, I mean ‘women of color’, gotta get it right…let’s primarily cast them in lead roles”. So I don’t see his departure as a bad thing. Unfortunately many of his plans will probably stay in.

Lower the budget for the next film. Write some intelligent dialog for adults. Get a more interesting title. Two, not three years between films. If another starship is to be destroyed, let it be the USS CLINTON! HA!

I just about spewed my coffee. . . LOL!

OK look, the JJverse (I refuse to use his term for it) just didn’t work. I get that it’s a totally different bunch of our old characters, but it just wasn’t OUR characters. We didn’t care (at least I and my family didn’t).

We also don’t like to be relegated to the back of the bus (4 years between ST09 and STID then 3 years between STID and STB). When Star Trek worked in the theater, they were every other year and on the extreme 3 years out.

This whole JJverse would have worked if they had just done away with the new timeline aspect and made it the prime universe AND paid just a bit more attention to details. #1 of those details. . . QUIT KILLING THE ENTERPRISE! OUR Enterprise was stout and ready to handle all obstacles. The elimination of the cost of those special effects alone would more than likely helped reduce the overall budget, kept the profit margin closer and kept the fans in the game.

PS: Congrats to the Chicago Cubs and their fans!! You guys have waited a lot longer for another Championship than any Star Trek fan has waited for their venue of entertainment!

Millennial stupid speak – “kind of utterly, kind of a little bit”. Brother! “Kind of” is this years “like”. They say something but do not want to be bound to it. Also ending a sentence with the last word sounding like a question. Uhhg.

Krall looks a lot more human than Trump.

One thing I wanted to point out in regards to the chances of another movie in this timeline, is that Paramount is separate from CBS. CBS has a clear revenue opportunity going forward with TV shows in the Trek universe(s), but Paramount doesn’t, if it doesn’t continue with these movies. I think that is incentive enough for Paramount to keep pushing them – whether it is with reduced budgets, smaller scope movies, etc. The one thing I can’t see them doing is recasting some of the cast – I think with this group it is all or none, they seem to be like a family both on screen and behind the scenes. Yes, I think Paramount could stop with the Kelvin timeline movies and try another Trek movie series (maybe in the Prime universe) but I think that would have to wait on and depend on the success of the TV show(s).

IMO, Beyond’s numbers were a direct result of being released so late in the summer. If it had come out in May or June, I have no doubt it would have done significantly better.

For the Beyond sequel obviously we know Chris Hemsworth is back as Kirk’s dad (JJ said so), but I’m gonna throw an extra twist in there: Hemsworth is in for flashbacks only. What we actually get is William Shatner playing an aged Kirk’s dad after he conveniently fell through a space-time disturbance and ended up on some uncharted planet following the destruction of the Kelvin.

I was actually thinking there would be some mirror universe trickery for Hemsworth’s part

For me, I’d say they should embrace the changes in the timeline and follow Kirk to his next command on a new starship not called Enterprise with a mostly different supporting cast.

One of things that became obvious down the years was that Kirk can function without Spock, but Spock’s one significant appearance without Kirk in TNG proved he was deathly dull without Messrs Pine or Shatner.

So let’s have Star Trek 4 focusing on the two Kirks, almost as a spinoff. Rather than ‘TOS on speed pills,’ let’s do something new.

I don’t buy this “Into Darkness ruined the new movies for me” line. Come on if Star Wars fans felt this way about Force Awakens because of the prequels it wouldn’t have made 2 billion dollars. No it was a combination of the time of year it was released and Star Trek fans acting like petulant children holding their breath and telling their parents they won’t eat their broccoli because they won’t get any ice cream.

It’s so stupid, even if you didn’t like STID it shouldn’t have kept you away from Beyond. How many movie series have had some bad movies in the mix but true fans still see the next movie. Hell if I felt this way I would have stayed away from 09 Trek because of the sour taste in my mouth from those horrible TNG movies. Good god if a Trek movie is going to keep you away from future flicks, it will be Insurrection, not STID. Beyond is a good movie but I suspect many here still refuse to see it, that they are still holding their breath, hoping they can sneak the broccoli to the dog.

Harry Plinkett,

Re: How many movie series have had some bad movies in the mix but true fans still see the next movie.

“True fans” talk is frowned on around these parts. Besides, do you really want to commit to this logic that says after INSURRECTION only THE true fans subjected themselves to NEMESIS?

Of course not, all fans should always support the franchise in all forms. I saw Nemesis despite hating Insurrection. I’ll watch Discovery if and when it does appear, even though my hopes are pretty low at this point. However it’s this pouty, arms folded, sulking attitude that some have of the KT universe that makes them rather see the entire thing fail then support something outside their particular comfort zone that I find absolutely ridiculous and counter productive to the franchise. Could these films have been better? Of course but that doesn’t mean they’re horrible and future endeavours should be avoided to “teach them a lesson”.

I’m not concerned about what’s frowned on around here because supporting this cry baby attitude is part of the problem with these “fans”. Sure I get argued with and posts deleted but censorship was never my bag and I frankly don’t care, I call it as I see it and I’ve seen some agreement here on my stand as well as other Trek forums, facebook pages, etc regarding these so called fans so I’m far from alone.

Harry Plinkett.

Re: all fans should always support the franchise in all forms

The trouble is history has shown that there were and are more ways to support STAR TREK than are dreamt of in your ticket buying philosophy, Harryatio.

Also, the idea of “the franchise” was a late to the party corporate bean counter creation by cynical Paramount executives that didn’t even know the first thing about supporting STAR TREK because they simply did not.

And you want to talk about whining crybabies not wanting to support something out of their comfort zone, you really need to read up on G&W owning Bludhorn’s meetings with his shiny newly bought Paramount execs when he told them they were going to be responsible for his shiny newly bought STAR TREK.

You can’t compare the success of TFA versus the disappointment of the prequels with STID and Beyond. Firstly way more time passed between the Prequels and TFA plus an entire creative/ownership change and a desire to embrace the “originals”.

The comparison only works if, after STID, they waited years, brought in a new creative driver (not JJ), changed to the Prime Universe and cast Shatner. Then we’d be close to apples and apples.

What STID did was blow up the mainstream goodwill created by 09, among those casual fans who generally wouldnt see Star Trek. With Beyond, they basically had to start all over again

Support stuff that’s bad. Sure, GREATErecipe for getting more of the same. If folks had shown some taste and stayed away from the Abrams films in the first place, we’d probably have already gotten a better quality Trek in theaters, what with the way evetything gets re-rebooted each decade.

I honestly don’t see why folks feel the need to embrace ALL of anything, be it TREK or BOND or POTTER. I love the third Potter and enjoy 4 through 7, but the first two were like watching paint dry, even though I dug those books. I could easily do without the whole Roger Moore run as Bond and nearly everything else with the 007 name on it after 1989. And I only really like three TREK movies a lot (none after 1989.) Some others are okay, some are just godawful. This isn’t a crybaby attitude, it is merely demonstrating critical faculties that work, instead of blind slavish acceptance/adoration.

@kmart – Your assumptions are based on what? We had no Trek for years after Insurrection. In your narrow world view, NOTHING is better than having movies that a good deal of Trek fans DO like. Kind of a selfish attitude don’t you think? So in your view we’ll have the KT movies die, then go another decade and HOPE someone else picks up the mantle and makes the Trek movie YOU want to see? Who’s to say they wouldn’t continue in another direction completely and make them more action/adventure oriented? Then fans complain about that, don’t support it and we go ANOTHER decade with no Trek. What’s your end game here? I’ve said it a million times, TOS style movies or movies like TMP are NEVER going to happen again because the small fanbase of Trek fans that think TOS is the greatest thing ever are not enough to financially support the films. You NEED general audiences to see Trek to make it viable and general audiences don’t give two sh*ts about TOS. I hate to break it to all you TOS fans but 75% of the original series is unwatchable garbage, especially season 3. TOS is NOT Star Trek anymore. It has moved well beyond it and isn’t going back. If Discovery tries, it WILL fail. So please stop talking to me about “taste” and “quality” when you worship at the shrine of Shatner with his bad acting and cardboard sets and rubber suit aliens. TOS screams anything… Read more »

In what universe are you living that there was no trek for years after INSURRECTION? Did you mean ENTERPRISE?

More on point, if you can’t see beyond production value issues, YOU HAVE NO VISION. Go listen to a few old radio shows or watch some non-gore horror films — projects that rely on subtle use of sound and shadow to generate chills — and maybe learn some appreciation for something other than Berman-level tastes.

End game? I don’t have any ‘end game’ — I’m somebody who hopes that there will be good Trek but certainly doesn’t expect it all to be good, and won’t ever give it a pass just because it has a brand name slapped on it.

Now, to quote the little-scene ‘subtle’ Shatner … go to your quarters — or I’ll pick you up and carry you there.

Harry Plinkett, Re: We had no Trek for years after Insurrection You type that as if you believe that it was some fluke that Trek managed to endure by the grace of Paramount, when it was Par (Pun intended.) for the course: Last unaired first series episode broadcast in middle of 1969 and no new filmed Trek featuring the original cast’s filmed acting mugs released until the last month of 1979. Re: I hate to break it to all you TOS fans but 75% of the original series is unwatchable garbage, especially season 3 And season 3 was especially 100% Paramount corporate bean counter produced. You aren’t making much of a case as for why we should look towards an ersatz inheritor that never wanted or valued STAR TREK in the first place to make new Treks more worthwhile than what it’s produced before, and now the current movie pretender to the throne doesn’t even own the trademark? And how are you arriving at this “no going back” deduction? JK Rowling had her first HP rendered into a film and still kept writing the books. In fact, the film franchise relied and counted on her new books. This reasoning would seem to compel us to conclude that the real problem with STAR TREK on the big screen is Paramount didn’t realize that they had transformed it into an award winning cartoon in 1973 and there was “no going back”. Now, I have to admit the idea of Pixar getting their… Read more »
I think that Harry Plinkett is more correct than not. Star Trek movies have been stand alones and that is good and should continue to be this way. To me, it is about seeing each movie/series and judging them on their own merits, bearing in mind that opinions will vary because of their inherently subjective nature. For example, I came from watching TUC feeling a bit annoyed (a few too many “wtf’s” for me), but clearly there are many others who do not share my view. This is why I think it a bit disingenuous not to at least give another film in the franchise a go, even if the previous one may not have been to your particular taste. What Star Trek has always somehow managed to do is to give a little something to someone, and that is what makes it special. It can rarely give all to all (nothing can), but, for the most part, it has succeeded more often that it has failed. It may not be on some grand scale (like Star Wars, others), but so what. As long as it can make enough and that is where the fans can help. We can make constructive comments and suggestions and just maybe one of our ideas might be found useful… However, dumping on writers/directors etc (don’t deny it) helps no one, least of all, people who love and want to see more Star Trek, especially Kelvin timeline characters (and the present cast who play them).… Read more »

Im sure you want to see another film but it isnt your money. If STB had been better, perhaps the studio would have made money. It wasnt. They didnt.

“Bryan Fuller, who had overwhelming support amongst the Star Trek fan base..”
You’re kidding, right?

So what will make you fans happy?

The support pretty much was universal only that there was a new show coming to television. Then it the “subscription” aspect dwindled away some of us (myself included). The others had their reasons. Now what do we have? LOL, I have no [choose your foul word and insert here] idea. . . .

With any luck, the Kelvin timeline will be put into mothballs and decommissioned for good.

Not sure if you guys know but Star Trek Bridge Crew has been delayed till March 14th 2017. UbiSoft want more time to tune it up plus it’s rumoured they maybe adding the TOS and TNG content

It was also not marketed properly and CBS/Paramount have seemingly acted almost embarrassed about owning the franchise. The 50th anniversary should’ve been absolutely unforgettable…it’s actually been the opposite and more than a little disappointing.

Agreed, Nume.
Several of the Beyond posters didn’t even have “Star Trek” on them. Beyond! Beyond what? What’s this movie supposed to be …?

WORST PUBLICITY EVAR

CBS better save the headache and cash

and bail out now. This was a grand idea

that now seems like a drastic mistake.

Nobody seems to know where its going

or with who or even why. A few sensational

idea’s won’t carry this show or its future.

Destroying the Enterprise was dumb. I know they had limited time to make the movie once Orci’s superior script got canned. But how much time & money did they spend on destroying the Enterprise & then even using its wreck on the planet for a bit to maximise the spend! Search For Spock did it right just a few powerful scenes & then boom its gone forever. Beyond was made in a hurry & it shows. For the time they had its amazing but I does not hold up as well on repeat viewings & Beastie Boys tie-in also hurt box office due to the horrible trailer before TFA. Both Paramount decisions & they sacked Rob Moore for it so who knows if he insisted on those or not. ST4 if it goes ahead will have a reduced budget now so they better get creative on the writing hire Nick Meyer to write & direct if he wants make it the sort of film TWOK was but without the heroic sacrifice unless Nick can somehow make that work with this crew. Less is always more these movies do not need wall to wall action-FX just decent screenplays & use the sci-fi 23rd century trappings as backdrops to the story that way it will be cheaper & work better overall.

Give me a break – Orci would have had the Enterprise crippled in twenty seconds after being disabled by a super dreadnought.. that is if it was necessary since they could have just beamed across the galaxy. I’ll give Krall one thing in Beyond – with that transporter that can beam from the Klingon homeworld to Earth – what, no one would come and save them?? Ironically while I was initially opposed to the destruction of the Enterprise – they treated her with infinitely more respect then Orci did. The ship lasted more than 20 seconds and went down with phaser turrets and torpedo launchers firing, crews manning battle stations and at Red alert and that is after being tricked into a rescue mission gone wrong… and even then she almost escaped with impulse engines with no warp nacelles. The Enterprise-D warp core would have exploded like 20 seconds into that fight.

Cmd.Bremmon,

Re: Orci would have had the Enterprise crippled in twenty seconds

In the original, 2009 treatment it took the whole movie to get the Enterprise eaten by the Nero defeating final black hole. Presumably escaped by the crew using the new fancy shmancy transporters.

Cmd. Bremmon,
“Beyond’s” Enterprise destruction sequence was the best one I’ve seen, and as you say, she went down at maximum. What a great lady. It was the first KT movie in which I felt Enterprise was treated with the respect a great ship deserves, and she felt like a character, giving to the last.

treating the big E with real respect would have meant letting it fight and win.

The notion that only fighting and winning is worthy of any respect is what holds humanity’s emotional/spiritual development back.

The Enterprise, in both STID and STB, gave her all and still a bit more, because of the crew who knew her strengths and made them work as best they knew how.. How could the Enterprise win against a vessel like the Dreadnought? Any other ship would have gone down, but the Enterprise has her captain, one James T Kirk, and his good karma and the inherent strengths of this particular vessel make one unstoppable force, without even one torpedo necessarily needing to be fired sometimes
.
In STB, the Enterprise wasn’t going anywhere once it had crashed, but Kirk and Chekov managed to salvage some undamaged tech and that is what helped get the Franklin moving again. Part of the Enterprise “lived” on within the USS Franklin, an old ship which got the remaining crew back safely.

Now that is truly treating the Enterprise with the greatest respect!

*face palm*

I hope Nick Meyer, & Manny Coto, get picked to run the entire franchise. They could do it w/ the help of the Okudas, & Reeves-Stevens, David Gerold, & D.C Fontana, all as Executive Consultants. Well, at least I can dream that.

Fuller leaving and now them pushing it back to a May 2017 release instead of Jan. 2017 does not bode well. And to be honest, I’ve lost interest too – too much jockeying and too much uncertainty 6 months before its premiere is not a good sign. I’d just as soon watch reruns of TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT that I can easily get on any foreign streaming website.

It looks like Japan is going to close around $4.8 million. That’s less than half of what STID made, and about a million less than ST09. That brings the STB boxoffice total to around $343.5 million.

Give me a break guys! Of course there’s going to be a 4th movie! Sure probably reduced budget but sometimes those are the better films. All you have to do is look at Star Trek movie history.

FWIW there was some disagreement a while back as to whether the NX-01 was a production line engine shipped from the factory ready to jump to Warp 5 after a shakedown cruise:

http://www.chakoteya.net/Enterprise/23.htm

Well, she wasn’t. They didn’t get her up to Warp 5 until the 23rd episode. It was an experimental engine design:

” [Engineering]

TUCKER: Please tell me you’re ready to slow down.
ARCHER [OC]: Sorry Trip, but we need a little more speed.
TUCKER: I don’t know how much more I can give you.

[Bridge]

ARCHER: It’s called a warp five engine.

[Engineering]

TUCKER: On paper.

[Bridge]

ARCHER: We don’t have any choice, Trip.

[Engineering]

TUCKER: Aye, sir.

[Bridge]

(Archer stands and gestures to his chair.)
ARCHER: Ambassador. (she sits) Warp five.
TRAVIS: Four point nine three, nine five.

[Engineering]

TUCKER: Don’t take your eyes off that antimatter stream.
CREWWOMAN: Yes, sir.
(Everything is rattling, and smoke is coming out of vents.)

[Bridge]

TRAVIS: Four point nine seven.
REED: They’re matching our speed.
TRAVIS: Four point nine nine. Warp five.
(Big vibrations start.)

[Engineering]

(Lights flicker. The smoke from the vents has turned to flames.)
TUCKER: Tucker to the Bridge!

[Bridge]

ARCHER: Go ahead.
TUCKER [OC]: The port injectors just blew!

[Engineering]

TUCKER: We’ve got to slow down, Captain!” — FALLEN HERO, STAR TREK:ENTERPRISE

wpDiscuz