Will Star Wars ruin the Star Trek franchise?

[Picard Sisko]

Take this thread with nothing more than a grain of salt. I'm not here to say that Star Wars will ruin Star Trek, or get in its way. This is something I've been hearing from a lot of people lately, and wanted to discuss it here.

First, here is a timeline of the Star Trek/Star Wars movies and their release dates:

1977 - Star Wars
1979 - Star Trek: The Motion Picture
1980 - SW: The Empire Strikes Back
1982 - ST: Wrath of Khan
1983 - SW: Return of the Jedi
1984 - ST: The Search for Spock
1986 - ST: The Voyage Home
1989 - ST: The Final Frontier
1991 - ST: The Undiscovered Country
1994 - ST: Generations
1996 - ST: First Contact
1998 - ST: Insurrection
1999 - SW: The Phantom Menace
2002 - ST: Nemesis
2005 - SW: Revenge of the Sith
2009 - Star Trek
2013 - Star Trek Into Darkness
2015 - Star Wars: Episode VII

Having a Star Trek & Star Wars films being released only a few years apart isn't anything new. I think its a given that Star Wars will probably always make more money than Star Trek. With the 2009 film, it brought a lot of newcomers to come and see it. However, it was also the only major Sci-fi film to be released, and same with the upcoming Into Darkness.

With Star Wars coming out with new films, and an expanded universe (solo films for example), does anyone think it could ruin the chance of Star Trek really continuing, or will it end with the JJ Abrams movies (possibly a third and final one)?

 

[Soapy]

I think Star Wars will certainly eclipse Star Trek, but I don't think it will ruin it. I've always thought that the Abrams movies will end at the third one*, and I don't think Star Wars really changes that.

*The franchise will go on of course, I just mean that it's always been my opinion that Abrams and that cast and that crew would most likely pass the baton onto someone else after a third in the Abrams series.

 

[titansupes]

^Directors can change, fresh blood won't be a bad thing. As long as they maintain the energy of the Abrams tenure, the 'cool' factor (though I hope whoever takes the reigns isn't afraid to make Trek a bit smarter, again).

The cast bothers me... It's a really good cast, but as you said, I just can't picture most of them going more than three movies. Quinto I think has implied as much. That's just a damn shame. I'm used to a lot of time being spent with each Trek crew (TOS+TOS movies, TNG+TNG movies, 7 seasons of Voyager etc.).

Just seems a shame that losing such a crew (the original, ICONIC crew no less) after so few adventures.

 

[Soapy]

Well, personally I was never under the impression that these new movies were meant to have a decades long run like The Original Series and The Next Generation. To me it seems like the goal for Abrams and the cast was simply to revjuvinate and reenergize the franchise and then move on, allowing a new group of people to put their mark on the series.

Which to me at least, is the most exciting thing about the reboot; Where does the series go after Abrams and the current cast step down?

 

[RetrogradeOrbit]

I don't think that Star Wars will have any effect on Star Trek... Not for the general audience anyway.

Some of us fanboys and girls may have a meltdown here and there though...

 

[Picard Sisko]

Well, personally I was never under the impression that these new movies were meant to have a decades long run like The Original Series and The Next Generation. To me it seems like the goal for Abrams and the cast was simply to revjuvinate and reenergize the franchise and then move on, allowing a new group of people to put their mark on the series.

Which to me at least, is the most exciting thing about the reboot; Where does the series go after Abrams and the current cast step down?

I agree. Hopefully, we get a new series. I think it would work best if Star Wars continued making movies, while Star Trek found a home on television, with a feature film every once in a while.

I think the biggest mistake Paramount made was waiting to make TNG movies until after the series concluded. By the time Generations came out, the cast was getting tired, and they seemed to have run out of great ideas for that crew. Why not make a film during the series' run? Best of Both Worlds could have made a great film.

 

[snyderrocks]

star trek will always be better then star wars .

 

[Octoberist]

I don't know about that.

 

[Picard Sisko]

star trek will always be better then star wars .

In my personal opinion, Star Trek is better. But in the end, its a matter of taste. Both franchises are vastly different, and only get compared because they have the word "Star" in the name. If it was Star Trek and Space Wars, I wonder if the rivalry would be the same.

 

[Soapy]

I don't know about that. I think it has much more to do with the fact that both franchises are incredibly successful. If either Star Trek or Star Wars was some niche/cult little thing like Farscape for example, do you think the two fanbases would be so eager to compare them?

Regarding the quality, if you just want to look at the movies, I think Star Wars has higher peaks and lower valleys while Star Trek is more even. However that doesn't take into account the hundreds and hundreds of hours of television Star Trek has produced, much of it pretty damn good. So I guess just by the sheer amount of good content, I have to think Star Trek is better.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I think even at Star Trek's lowest (Enterprise), it never sunk to the level that Star Wars did with the prequel films.

 

[Octoberist]

That's...true actually. The Prequels are an awkward bunch. IF JJ's Star Wars recaptures the magic and quality of the originals, then we can easily say the Prequel will be the Roger Moore of the Star Wars films. Moonraker. Octopussy. A View to a Kill. Pure cheese and one of the lowest points for the series.

 

[Marvin]

which is seen as the better sequel
Empire strikes back or Kahn? In the geek community.

 

[titansupes]

which is seen as the better sequel
Empire strikes back or Kahn? In the geek community.

I think it depends on how you look at it. Empire was coming off one of the biggest movies of all time, Wrath was reinventing itself after a poor first outing. So they've both done very well.

I love 'em both, but my first love of those two is Star Wars. And I think it's probably just the better film of the two.

 

[DaddlerTheDalek]

I like both.
I don't think that Star Wars will ruin Star Trek.

 

[smallville fan]

Well with the timing Disney has been releasing Star Wars announcements and attaching JJ Abrams' name it's pretty clear that they want to one-up the competition. That's what competing businesses who are all after profit, revenue and publicity do.

Right now, Disney is just troll-facing Paramount and they are:
1) Laughing at them for not putting a clause in their contract stating that Abrams cannot involve himself with another company and franchise.

2) Generating publicity for Episode 7. I bet at every press conference there's going to be that one guy who asks about Star Wars.


I mean watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9B1ERvl87w

The "conspiracy" discussed actually seems sound.

 

[Picard Sisko]

As I've heard around here, the success of one franchise shouldn't hurt another.

 

[smallville fan]

As I've heard around here, the success of one franchise shouldn't hurt another.

Yeah sure Star Wars Episode 7 won't do anything to Star Trek's box office success, but what Disney is doing is just free-riding on Paramount's Star Trek movie and generating publicity to up stage them.

I mean if you were the CEO of KFC and you heard that McDonalds stole your secret formula for "good chicken" and constantly publicized it, would you be pissed?

 

[Picard Sisko]

Yeah sure Star Wars Episode 7 won't do anything to Star Trek's box office success, but what Disney is doing is just free-riding on Paramount's Star Trek movie and generating publicity to up stage them.

I mean if you were the CEO of KFC and you heard that McDonalds stole your secret formula for "good chicken" and constantly publicized it, would you be pissed?

Ugh I hate Disney so much. But I can understand what you are saying.

Honestly, all I care about is that a third movie gets made and its good. I don't care if it hits the billion dollar mark or not (although it would be cool if it did), I just want it to be a good movie.

No matter what, Star Wars will always make more money anyway, and be more popular to the GA (doesn't mean it is "better" at all however). But I believe that those who liked the JJ Abrams 2009 Star Trek film will still go on to see Into Darkness and the third film in 2015-16.

 

[psylockolussus]

Nah, if Paramount keeps doing their own thing with Star Trek and keeps producing good films.

 

[thestartrekker]

I think the biggest danger to NuTrek on the big screen would be bad NuTrek movies.
If the movies are good, the two will co-exist as they always have.

 

[Airwings]

First, here is a timeline of the Star Trek/Star Wars movies and their release dates:

1977 - Star Wars
1979 - Star Trek: The Motion Picture
1980 - SW: The Empire Strikes Back
1982 - ST: Wrath of Khan
1983 - SW: Return of the Jedi
1984 - ST: The Search for Spock
1986 - ST: The Voyage Home
1989 - ST: The Final Frontier
1991 - ST: The Undiscovered Country
1994 - ST: Generations
1996 - ST: First Contact
1998 - ST: Insurrection
1999 - SW: The Phantom Menace
2002 - ST: Nemesis
2005 - SW: Revenge of the Sith
2009 - Star Trek
2013 - Star Trek Into Darkness
2015 - Star Wars: Episode VII

Haven't you forgotten one?

However, it was also the only major Sci-fi film to be released, and same with the upcoming Into Darkness.

Oblivion wasn't a major sci fi?

 

[Airwings]

double post

 

[YavinIV]

I highly doubt that SW could ruin ST (or vice versa).

A main difference lies in the fact that ST has become an established institution in regard of television. On TV, TOS, TNG and all the other spin-offs have been rerun for years. My parents used to love TOS and they watch it every time its on TV. Same with TNG. I grew up with TNG and will watch it whenever it's on. From my parents and from their watching the reruns of TOS, I got to love TOS and watch it, too.
The shows never actually vanish, they are always there. The older generations keep seeing Bond films because they've simply grown up with them. So any ST film will be watched by those who grew up with the series, or those who grew up with the reruns.

 

[Farren]

No. If Star Trek dies, it will have nothing to do with Star Wars. It will have to do with stupidity within it's own franchise.

I think that, at worst, the danger to Star Trek from Star Wars is if ST tries to become TOO MUCH like SW. The reboot films have drifted more into the action genre, and in the realm of scifi action, SW probably has ST beat. But if ST sticks to it's core qualities moving forward, I'm not worried about the threat of SW.