In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, Star Trek Beyond co-writer Doug Jung praised the original series’ storytelling variety, saying:
“What I did realize, in having looked at them a little bit more as a writer than as a fan, is there are so many different kinds of stories you can tell. They vacillate wildly in the original series. I love ‘City on the Edge of Forever,’ the ones that have that Twilight Zone-kind of feel. But ‘The Doomsday Machine’ is one of my favorites, this fast-paced science-fiction. They contain these kind of amazing parables, commentaries. I remember thinking: It’s amazing how many different kinds of stories they can do.”
True. It’s too bad then what Jung took from this lesson, once again pitching, to the public, one of the worst possible ideas for the future of the Star Trek movie series. “It’s a franchise that can support different styles of movies,” Jung said. So far so good. “There’s the big action tentpole feel of Star Trek and the Enterprise …” uh oh, “...but why not try to do something that’s the Zero Dark Thirty version of Star Trek, or one that introduces some younger characters at the Academy?”
This isn’t the first time that someone has floated the possibility of a Zero Dark Thirty set in the Star Trek universe. Marc Evans, President of the Motion Picture Group for Paramount Pictures, told Wired, “I often think about the areas of the Star Trek universe that haven’t been taken advantage of… like, I’ll be ridiculous with you, but what would Star Trek: Zero Dark Thirty look like? Where is the SEAL Team Six of the Star Trek universe? That fascinates me.”
This is a terrible idea, maybe the worst possible direction for a movie series that’s already far more action-oriented than its source material. Star Trek: Zero Dark Thirty would also be a moral evil; a stain on one of our few remaining sources of utopian vision in a modern world of environmental calamity and rampant militarism. It’s hard to imagine something more antithetical to Star Trek than a Call of Duty lookalike shipping Starfleet hit squads around the galaxy. Didn’t these people get enough Federation military machinations in Star Trek Into Darkness? I thought we were done with this shit.
Even absent the moral offense, there are a number of practical problems with the expansive franchise universe vision that would make spinoff Star Trek movies a tricky sell.
“Why not blow it out to a cinematic universe that has secondary characters, and smaller storylines, more intimate storylines, ones that deal with more of an espionage element versus the large-scale exploration themes of the main Star Trek?” Jung said to EW . While it sounds like a nice idea, there are a number of practical considerations in the way. For one, even a Star Trek movie with a smaller budget would require the same blow-out marketing expenses.
Unfortunately, the blockbuster factory model isn’t very conducive to narrative flexibility on the level Jung proposes. Would a smaller Star Trek story play to international markets? Why would studios take the gamble when the action-adventure mold that works so well for Marvel can be emulated over and over?
Disney is learning some of those lessons right now with Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. When big-budget franchises attempt to do “smaller” side stories, the same expectations often follow, which has forced Disney to frantically downplay Rogue One ’s box office chances during shareholder calls. When your investors expect the spin-off to do as well as The Force Awakens, you’re in trouble. Star Trek would face many of the same difficulties, additionally hampered by the lackluster box office performance of the series so far.
The appeal of smaller Star Trek stories is obvious, especially now that Star Trek: Discovery has fallen into Akiva Goldsman’s hands. But with ideas like Star Trek: Zero Dark Thirty, the prospects are grim. If all Paramount has to offer is variations on Star Trek: Space Guantanamo Prison Guard Squad and Star Trek: The Kissinger Doctrine, maybe we should just stick with the Enterprise.
