Voyager/Deep Space Nine Crossover Movie

[Tachyon]

If there had been a Voyager/Deep Space Nine movie planned somewhere around 2003 ... 2005, what would have been your first thoughts of such a movie? Would you have been extremely excited about it or would you have been super skeptic and predicted a huge flop?

Personally I would have loved to see one.

 

[Too Much Fun]

I would think it's too much too soon. Personally, I would never want to see Voyager involved in the film franchise in any way, but if they had to include it, I believe the best way would have been through that "passing the torch" tradition. In other words, we'd first have a movie where the TNG crew symbolically (or literally) makes way for the DS9 crew and then Voyager comes to prominence in the sequel to that movie. Therefore, Star Trek IX would be DS9's big screen foray, and Star Trek X would be the first movie to feature the Voyager crew and still, just as it is today (but for different reasons), the movie that killed the Star Trek franchise for six years (appropriately enough ) .

 

[Piper]

I had hoped that once DS9 finished we might get the odd TVM every few years, but it didn't happen. VOY, not so much.

 

[cardinal biggles]

I never really wanted to see either DS9 or VOY get movies of their own. In large part, this was because of the stories. While DS9 started pretty open-ended, by the second half of the series, it was pretty clearly about the Dominion War. The war ends in the series finale, the crew splits up, so the storyline was wrapped up pretty well. Same with VOY — their objective: get home. They got home, so where's the story?

 

[Lord Garth]

TNG wasn't easily translatable into movies and I think it would've been even worse with DS9.

Oddly, I think Voyager was the easiest to make a movie series out of. There was a three-character lead with Janeway, Seven, and the Doctor like there was with TOS. The stories were largely self-contained. With Voyager in constantly moving in one direction, it couldn't keep running into the same enemies*, with the exception of Borg.

* The best they could do was rationalize it would take a year to move through a certain area of space.

Instant resets. Then they got home. Nowhere to go from there. Sure, there's what happened after they got home but is that movie material?

DS9 and VOY wouldn't have worked as movie series any better than TNG. And a crossover movie definitely wouldn't have worked. The two series were so different from each other, they would've been very difficult to mesh.

 

[cardinal biggles]

^They could have saved the "getting home" part for a movie. Call it Star Trek: The Voyager Home.

 

[CoveTom]

Well, first of all, I don't think TNG was a particularly difficult series to translate to the movies. I just think the people who did it made the assumption that in order to be successful as a film franchise TNG had to abandon many of its core elements as a series. Supposedly to appeal to some mass moviegoing audience. Which boggles the mind, since TNG was the one and only Star Trek series to truly break through the "Star Trek barrier" and achieve widespread mainstream audience acceptance during its run.

Having said that, I do believe DS9 would have been very difficult to do well as a feature film. Sure, I personally would love to see more DS9, but not if it's going to be done badly or ruin what's come before. DS9 was so much a serial by the end of its run that they weren't even making an attempt to make it accessible to outside audiences. There really is no way at all that a casual viewer could have come in during the sixth or seventh seasons and picked it up from there, or that someone could have watched a handful of episodes each season and found them satisfying. As a result, they would have either had to move to a completely different form of storytelling, or make a movie for an incredibly specialized audience, neither of which would have really worked.

With Voyager, I think the series itself lends itself to films as much as TNG, but therein lies the problem. If the producers couldn't figure out how to successfully translate the mega-hit that was TNG to the big screen, were they really going to figure out how to transfer the rather mediocre Voyager there successfully? I mean, Voyager is a show that couldn't figure itself out on TV. What is its focus going to be in the movies?

No, I think the feature film franchise was rightly in the lap of TNG. And, frankly, I think that's where it should still be today. But with films that are close in spirit to the actual TNG and not glorified Picard/Data action films. Alas, it appears that's not going to be the case.

 

[Argus Skyhawk]

Would you have been extremely excited about it or would you have been super skeptic and predicted a huge flop?

Both. I would have loved to see it, and would have expected it to flop.

 

[apenpaap]

I would like to see a DS9 or VOY movie, however these series both ended their storylines. It's going to take a lot of effort to bring either of their crews back together in a believable way.

 

[Joker]

My first thought would have been "Haha, morons".

 

[Piper]

I would never have wanted to have watched a DS9/Voyager movie but I was always waiting for a TNG/DS9 crossover!

Yeah, I was a bit disappointed that they didn't try a bigger crossover than they did. Birthright was a bit of a wasted opportunity - I would have loved a two parter, one of which was a TNG episode, the second a DS9 or vice versa, like ER/Third Watch or CSI/Without a Trace did subsequently.

 

[Cyke101]

I'm kind of curious to see what Spiner and Logan had in mind when they said they planned XI to be a crossover movie. But if it was going to be anything like Nemesis...

 

[ChristopherPike]

I believe Logan & Spiner's thoughts for Star Trek XI were for a kind of Justice League of Star Trek. What mix of TNG, DS9 and VOY characters, I guess we'll never know. Personally it would still have to be mostly TNG for me. Maybe with O'Brien back on aboard the Enterprise and Bashir replacing Crusher. Perhaps a decent exit for Picard during the film, paving the way for a new Captain... assuming Patrick Stewart's price tag was too high for the full two hours.

 

[cardinal biggles]

^I'll have to search TrekToday, but I'm pretty sure Spiner said at a convention that their idea was to somehow bring the five captains together.

Considering the ridiculous lengths they have to go to on Doctor Who to bring multiple Doctors together and have a reasonably coherent story, I can only see this film being full of fail.

 

[ChristopherPike]

Considering the ridiculous lengths they have to go to on Doctor Who to bring multiple Doctors together and have a reasonably coherent story, I can only see this film being full of fail.

All the Captains in the same place, at the same time. That's a hell of a stretch and something only Q could feasibly do. 5 leads all competing would only end in tears...

Now... the other rumour I quite liked was Mirror Kirk leading an invasion on the 24th Century. Mainly for the improbable sight of Shatner kicking the collective butt of TNG, DS9 and VOY. Yes, I'm doubtful Bill can do bad guy without adding two layers of ham. But maybe as an insane Emperor out to expand the Terran Empire across two universes.

 

[TheGodBen]

DS9 had a story which ended, and I feel it ended successfully, so any attempt to bring the crew back together would have felt tacked-on and had the potential to ruin the ending DS9 already had. So no.

As for Voyager... just no.

 

[Lord Garth]

Well, first of all, I don't think TNG was a particularly difficult series to translate to the movies. I just think the people who did it made the assumption that in order to be successful as a film franchise TNG had to abandon many of its core elements as a series. Supposedly to appeal to some mass moviegoing audience. Which boggles the mind, since TNG was the one and only Star Trek series to truly break through the "Star Trek barrier" and achieve widespread mainstream audience acceptance during its run.

The problem is Paramount wouldn't -- and didn't -- find core elements of TNG acceptable for a movie in the mid-'90s climate. Action, CGI, explosions. That's what they wanted. I think TNG was going to be something it wasn't no matter what.

Slowly this is becoming not enough anymore, and times have begun change as we've moved away from the Bush era, but still have a ways to go before there would ever be a TNG TNG movie.

I always thought it was ironic when Lily told Picard she envied the world he was going to when all she mostly saw were the Borg and a rage-filled Picard. If it were me, I wouldn't think the 24th Century would be all that different. I'd tell Picard that humanity may have united but all that's really changed is that they're fighting aliens instead of each other.

 

[rramarr]

I would think it's too much too soon. Personally, I would never want to see Voyager involved in the film franchise in any way, but if they had to include it, I believe the best way would have been through that "passing the torch" tradition. In other words, we'd first have a movie where the TNG crew symbolically (or literally) makes way for the DS9 crew and then Voyager comes to prominence in the sequel to that movie. Therefore, Star Trek IX would be DS9's big screen foray, and Star Trek X would be the first movie to feature the Voyager crew and still, just as it is today (but for different reasons), the movie that killed the Star Trek franchise for six years (appropriately enough ) .

How does that timeline work out where ADMIRAL Kathryn Janeway can be giving orders to Captain Picard in 2379 aboard the Enterprise E. A Voyager movie would not be able to fit after that because Janeway was already an admiral. Was the Voyager; with Janeway and the Enterprise-E; with Picard, commissioned in space at the same time?

 

[CoveTom]

The problem is Paramount wouldn't -- and didn't -- find core elements of TNG acceptable for a movie in the mid-'90s climate. Action, CGI, explosions. That's what they wanted. I think TNG was going to be something it wasn't no matter what.

Exactly. The thing about that which continues to boggle my mind, however -- though I suppose nothing Hollywood does should surprise me -- is that they felt this way despite TNG being such a major, major success.

I think people today sometimes forget just how big TNG was in its heyday. This was a syndicated sci-fi series and yet it was regularly kicking butt in the ratings. Heck, in those all important young demographics, TNG was regularly beating Monday Night Football for a time!

It never ceases to amaze me how major studios will take something that is wildly successful as it exists and still feel that they have to radically change it in order to make it more appealing to mass audiences...

 

[Too Much Fun]

I would think it's too much too soon. Personally, I would never want to see Voyager involved in the film franchise in any way, but if they had to include it, I believe the best way would have been through that "passing the torch" tradition. In other words, we'd first have a movie where the TNG crew symbolically (or literally) makes way for the DS9 crew and then Voyager comes to prominence in the sequel to that movie. Therefore, Star Trek IX would be DS9's big screen foray, and Star Trek X would be the first movie to feature the Voyager crew and still, just as it is today (but for different reasons), the movie that killed the Star Trek franchise for six years (appropriately enough ) .

How does that timeline work out where ADMIRAL Kathryn Janeway can be giving orders to Captain Picard in 2379 aboard the Enterprise E. A Voyager movie would not be able to fit after that because Janeway was already an admiral. Was the Voyager; with Janeway and the Enterprise-E; with Picard, commissioned in space at the same time?

I could be wrong because I don't pay much attention to Voyager, its timeline, or its mythology, but I don't think there was any mention of Janeway being an admiral until Nemesis and in the hypothetical scenario I proposed, Nemesis wouldn't exist.