STAR TREK: BEYOND
Yet another entry into the lousy reboot of an underperforming film franchise.

1 STAR
Film Review © 2016 by Trip Reynolds

Science Fiction

Directed by Stuart Baird; Screenplay by Rick Berman, John Logan, and Brent Spiner; Produced by Rick Berman; Executive Produced by Marty Hornstein.

Starring Patrick Stewart (as Captain Jean-Luc Picard), LeVar Burton (as chief engineer, Geordi La Forge), Brent Spiner (as Data), Jonathan Frakes (as first officer, William Riker), Gates McFadden (as doctor Beverly Crusher), Marina Sirtis (as Counselor Deanna Troi, and the new Mrs. William Riker), Wil Wheaton (as Wesley Crusher), Whoopi Goldberg (as Guinan), Michael Dorn (as Worf), Kate Mulgrew (as Star Trek: Voyager's Captain Kathryn Janeway), Majel Barrett (as the federation ship computer voice), Thomas Hardy (as Picard's nemesis and deteriorating clone, Shinzon), Ron Perlman (as Romulan Viceroy), Jude Ciccolella (as Commander Suran), Shannon Cochran (as Senator Tal'aura), Alan Dale (as Praetor Hiran), Robertson Dean (as reman Officer), J. Patrick McCormack (as Commander), Dina Meyer (as romulan Commander Donatra), Michael Owen (as Helm Officer Branson), David Ralphe (as Commander), John Berg (as Senator), and Steven Culp.

Paramount needs to hire a screen writer and director who truly understand how to evolve both the Star Trek franchise AND, most importantly, the art of storytelling.

It serves absolutely no purpose to go back in time to re-image the origins of Star Trek. We've been there. We've done that. Instead, it would be far more interesting to pick-up from where ST:TNG and Voyage and ST:DS9 ended to lead us ALL to an entirely new Star Trek universe. For example, there are many questions and stories that could have been developed from
abandoned plotlines:

1. What ultimately happened to the Borg?

2. Where Did Captain Sisko go and what did he ultimately evolve into?

3. Did the Doctor on Voyager truly become sentient?

4. As disclosed in ST:TNG, how did the Federation ultimately solve the problem that wrap
travel was tearing-away the fabric of the universe?

5. What happened to galactic prodigy Wesley Crusher?

Plus, Star Trek and other SCIFI programs/movies have touched on the following issue since day one, but without a satisfying conclusion, "at what point do humans evolve ["ascension" as in SG-1] to a higher level? I truly love Kirk, Spock, Bones and all of the "realities" established by ST:TOS. But, I resent the "re-imagining" of the franchise. It's a blatant insult to the intelligence of the legendary fan base, and clearly limits a "new audience" to the re-telling of stories and plot-lines that do not
inspire, entertain, or educate (that's right, educate). Frankly, for at least the past 10 years, William Shatner's books and audio books, which feature a "current" Star Trek timeline that combines both ST:TOS and ST:TNG (and cameos from ST:DS9 and ST:V) have been far more interesting than all of the feature films. In this regard, here's a final Note to Paramount: Why don't you make a feature film release of the audiobook, "Star Trek: Excalibur"?

They had their chances but, as again demonstrated by this latest failing effort, the progeny of the original Enterprise has consistently failed to make compelling films. Without question, films made by the original crew are superior to Trek's Next Generation (ST:TNG). Like it or not, the impact of Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Uhura, Chekov, and Sulu is not even remotely reduced by the appearance of Picard, La Forge, Data, Riker, Worf, Crusher, Troi, and Guinan. This second series in the Trek television franchise has never been effectively transitioned to motion pictures. If this is finally the last Next Generation movie, then good riddance.

Collectively, there's been more excitement in the Next Generation television series than in any of the Next Generation movies. Let's hope Paramount doesn't make anymore Next Generation movies. So, as far as feature films, what's left? A "Star Trek: Deep Space IX (ST:DS9)" film? Or, a "Star Trek: Voyager (ST:V)" movie? Probably, neither. For the interim, Paramount should place greater focus on the new "Enterprise" television series and, hopefully, recapture the success generated by the original Star Trek television series.

Sadly, it really appears Paramount doesn't know exactly what to do with the Star Trek franchise on television or film. Afterall, if Paramount really wanted Star Trek to succeed why engage in an on-going practice of flip-flopping character development and engineering the planned cancellation of their own shows? Consider the following: in film, they killed Spock and then brought him back to life; on television, they kept Mr. Scott (from the original Star Trek) alive in a transporter loop for placement during the "real time" of ST:TNG; on television, they began the "real time" of ST:TNG with Dr. McCoy still alive and well walking on the Enterprise; but in film they killed Captain Kirk. Plus, despite on-going success, Paramount has been eliminating the televised Star Trek: gone is ST:TNG; gone is ST:DS9; and eventually first run episodes of ST:V will disappear. Again, does Paramount really want Star Trek to succeed? Plus, as with the transfer of Michael Dorn (Worf) from ST:TNG to ST:DS9, and the cameo of original Star Trek character Spock to ST:TNG, why doesn't Paramount consider even more "open" exchanges of the Star Trek "family" of characters, and particularly in the feature films? This would certainly put some surprises, twists and turns in the Star Trek universe. Why not?

Ultimately, the greatest harm to the Star Trek universe was the death of Kirk which, I believe, continues to have a negative impact on both the television programs and feature films. If Paramount is smart, and if they have the money, they should bring back Kirk. Even an old Kirk is a helluva lot more entertaining than a younger and more cerebral Picard. Of course, Paramount would make "big money" bringing Kirk back to life by marketing and exploiting every conceivable aspect of the event. It's a win - win, but not to Paramount. By the way, if you didn't know, Captain Kirk continues to live in William Shatner's books and audiobooks which are quite enjoyable.

Let's not have any more Star Trek films unless Paramount decides to bring back Captain James T. Kirk. For more information on the movement (yes, there's a movement) to bring back Kirk, go to the official web site:

Film is directed with (yawn) "been there, done that" pseudo-bravado by Stuart Baird.

Film is episodically paced with a running length of 117 minutes.

Recommendation: It's strictly a B-movie to watch between 2:00 a.m. and 4:00 a.m. on the Syfy cable channel!