Star Trek Films: My Tier List

A spoiler warning graphic.

Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for all fourteen Star Trek films, including Section 31.

Almost five years ago, I put all of the Star Trek films into a ranked list. I talked about what I liked and didn’t like about each, and tried to justify my choices! But since I wrote that list, a couple of things have happened. Firstly, I’ve gotten better at using images here on the website – that old piece looks pretty janky in comparison to some of my more recent articles. But secondly – and way more importantly – there’s been a new Star Trek film since then!

I think Trekkies are still a little divided on whether the made-for-streaming Section 31 should count as a Star Trek “film,” and I get that. But for me, Section 31 has the runtime of an (admittedly rather short) film, it’s not a series, miniseries, or anything like that, it has mostly original characters, and it was afforded a higher budget than any individual Star Trek episode would’ve been. For all intents and purposes, Section 31 counts as the newest Star Trek film – the fourteenth since 1979… and hopefully not the last!

Promo photo of Star Trek: Section 31 showing Quasi.
Section 31 is the most recent Star Trek film, and it’s on this list!

So today, I’m going to revisit the Star Trek films, this time using the internet-friendly tier list format that you might’ve seen on a couple of other occasions here on the website! I think most folks have a vague idea about tier lists at this point – but if you don’t, I’ll happily explain how it works.

Instead of giving each film a number from 1-14, which would be hard, we’re going to assign each film one of five tiers: D, C, B, A, and S. D-tier films are the least-enjoyable with noticeable flaws, C-tier titles are average or “just okay,” B-tier films are a step up, being above average, A-tier titles are getting really good, and S-tier is reserved for the absolute cream of the crop! Why is S-tier the top instead of A or something like A-plus? The truth is… I don’t know! But that’s the way everyone else does it, so I’m sticking with it! Some tier lists also include an F-tier for absolute disasters, but since I don’t consider any of the fourteen Star Trek films to be that bad, I’ve opted not to include it on this occasion.

A tier list with ranks S through D and fourteen question marks where the entries would be.
Let’s fill out this blank tier list together!

Now that the explanation of the format is out of the way, a handful of important caveats!

Firstly, all of this is subjective, not objective. There is no “objectively best” Star Trek film, and even within the fan community opinions vary wildly on which titles are better and what makes for a good Star Trek story. So if I rank a title you hate highly or speak ill of your favourite… that’s okay! There ought to be enough room in the fan community for civil conversations and polite disagreement.

Secondly, this piece supersedes my old film ranking list, and I have made a couple of changes to where films were ranked five years ago. I’ll be leaving the old piece as it is, though – it’s a part of the website and it would be silly to delete it! But going forward, this is the official Trekking with Dennis Star Trek films tier list!

Still frame from Star Trek: The Motion Picture showing the assembled crew.
Admiral Kirk addressing his crew in The Motion Picture.

Third, I’ll rank each production in order of release, beginning with The Motion Picture and finishing with Section 31. Then I’ll show you the final tier list at the end. I’ll do my best to explain what I liked and/or didn’t like about each title to justify my ranking – but please feel free to vehemently disagree if you like!

Finally, all of this is just for fun! I like writing, I like Star Trek, and finding an excuse to talk about some of the Star Trek films that I love – or that I haven’t seen in a while – is supposed to be a bit of escapism. Nothing about this should be taken too seriously, because the point of Star Trek for me has always been entertainment and escaping to a fun vision of the future.

With all of that out of the way, let’s begin.

Film #1:
The Motion Picture (1979)
Tier: S

Still frame from Star Trek: The Motion Picture showing Spock in a space suit.

The Motion Picture had a complicated production history! It was originally envisioned as a television series, bringing Star Trek back as Phase II in the late 1970s after re-runs of The Original Series had been growing in popularity. Actors had been cast, sets were being designed, and scripts were written… but then, in 1977, another sci-fi film’s wild success led to Phase II being reimagined as a feature film. Star Trek as a cinematic franchise was born!

In my experience, Trekkies tend to underrate and underappreciate The Motion Picture. In a very literal sense, much of the visual language of Star Trek was born here, not in 1966: metal Starfleet badges, the warp core as an upright glowing tube, angled corridors, Starfleet Headquarters, the re-designed Klingons… and so much more. Sets built for The Motion Picture would remain in continuous use all the way through Enterprise’s cancellation in 2005, defining what makes Star Trek look like Star Trek for millions of viewers.

Still frame from Star Trek: The Motion Picture showing Admiral Kirk in a hallway.

The Motion Picture also has one of what I consider to be the best starship introductions in the franchise – something that set the bar for other shows! Kirk and Scotty’s shuttlepod flight to the refit Enterprise – complete with Jerry Goldsmith’s Academy Award-nominated score – is beautiful, and I get teary-eyed every time I watch it. It’s one of the best moments in Star Trek for me, and everything about it is pitch-perfect.

I get that The Motion Picture’s main story isn’t for everyone. It was also a bit of a mess, with re-writes continuing even during filming, and that probably didn’t help. But for me, The Motion Picture plays out like an extended episode of The Original Series. It’s ethereal, thought-provoking, and not overladen with fast-paced action set-pieces. I think that’s to the film’s credit, even if many don’t agree.

I have a longer piece about The Motion Picture, written in 2019 to mark the film’s 40th anniversary. You can find it by clicking or tapping here.

Film #2:
The Wrath of Khan (1982)
Tier: S

Still frame from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan showing a close-up of Khan.

For many folks, The Wrath of Khan is still the Star Trek franchise’s high-water mark; a film that no other in the franchise has even come close to. I wouldn’t go that far personally – I think there are a couple of other equally brilliant films, as we’ll talk about in a moment – but The Wrath of Khan is definitely up there! The mix of sci-fi with high-octane action proved to be a perfect blend for Kirk and the crew, with a vengeance-obsessed Khan becoming one of the best villains not only in Star Trek, but in all of cinema.

The Wrath of Khan has one of the best and most intense starship battles in the franchise. Drawing inspiration from submarine and naval battles in World War II films, the fight between the badly-damaged Enterprise and Khan’s USS Reliant is incredible. The sequence builds up tension masterfully – by showing the extent of the damage to the Enterprise, by robbing Kirk and Khan of their sensors in the nebula, and with Spock cleverly explaining Khan’s “two-dimensional thinking” as a way to convey the tactics of starship battles in a three-dimensional space.

Still frame from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan showing the USS Reliant on the Enterprise's viewscreen.

Toward the end of The Wrath of Khan, we also get one of the most poignant and emotional moments in any film in the franchise… or really anywhere in the entirety of Star Trek, come to that. Spock’s death – sacrificing himself to save the Enterprise and his friends – really hits hard. Even though on my first viewing of The Wrath of Khan I already knew that Spock would be resurrected, there’s still a real emotional weight to this moment. Star Trek has attempted to do similar things with other characters (we’ll look at a couple further down the list) but none came close to matching this moment.

Ultimately, The Wrath of Khan was the first film to wrest control of Star Trek away from its creator, Gene Roddenberry, and to try new and different things with this cast of characters. It’s very different in tone and style from The Original Series, but that turned out to be a net positive for many fans – and many new fans, too. The Wrath of Khan firmly established Star Trek as a cinematic franchise.

Film #3:
The Search for Spock (1984)
Tier: A

Still frame from Star Trek III: The Search for Spock showing the surface of the Genesis Planet.

Sandwiched in between the ever-popular Wrath of Khan and the light-hearted Voyage Home, I think some folks can overlook The Search for Spock. As the middle part of a trilogy, the film has the difficult task of moving the story along but without being able to draw all of its story threads to a firm conclusion. For my money, though, it’s a great film – and it manages a complicated sci-fi story exceptionally well.

The Search for Spock gave us an extended look at the re-designed Klingons from The Motion Picture, and also introduced the Klingon Bird-of-Prey, arguably the faction’s most iconic spaceship. It’s the film which re-introduced the Klingons in a big way, expanded the Klingon language, and introduced starship and uniform designs that have become inseparable from the faction. The Klingon Empire as we know it would not be the same – and might not be a big part of Star Trek at all – without The Search for Spock and its main villain, Kruge.

Still frame from Star Trek III: The Search for Spock showing Uhura wielding a phaser pistol.

I’ve always appreciated the design of the Genesis Planet. The story of its creation is a bit “out there,” even by Star Trek standards, but the practical sets, props, and puppets created to represent the Genesis Planet all feel like ’80s sci-fi at its best. And yes, as a child of the ’80s I’m acutely aware of my biases here! But when I compare the way that The Search for Spock looks to modern Star Trek, with its CGI and AR wall… I can’t help it. I know what I like!

As the film that destroyed the original USS Enterprise, The Search for Spock was always going to court controversy. But I don’t agree with the take that “all of the odd-numbered Star Trek films are bad,” lumping The Search for Spock in with The Final Frontier. There are some wonderful moments of characterisation for David Marcus, Kirk, Dr McCoy, and others. And thanks to the insistence of director Leonard Nimoy, all of the main cast members got moments in the spotlight.

I have a longer piece about The Search for Spock – which was the first Star Trek film I watched – and you can find it by clicking or tapping here.

Film #4:
The Voyage Home (1986)
Tier: B

Still frame from Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home showing Kirk and Spock on a bus.

Maybe this is a “hot take,” but I’ve never been wild about The Voyage Home. As with similar Star Trek stories involving time travel to the modern day, its ’80s setting has left the film feeling so much more dated than any other in the cinematic franchise, and while I enjoy a good ’80s comedy as much as anyone else… it’s not necessarily what I want from a Star Trek film.

That being said, I don’t hate The Voyage Home by any stretch. It has some incredibly funny moments as Kirk and the crew attempt to navigate a time period that’s completely alien to them. Moments like Kirk asking if $100 is “a lot” of money, or Scotty trying to use a mouse to talk to a computer spring to mind as laugh-out-loud moments, and Spock having to cover his Vulcan ears to pass as a human is a fun look. Kirk and Spock’s confrontation with a punk on a city bus was also a hilarious moment.

Still frame from Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home showing HMS Bounty approaching the sun.

On the sci-fi side of things, I really like the design and power of the “whale probe.” I think it’s unintentionally one of the franchise’s most unnerving alien creations, too. Its design harkens back to The Doomsday Machine’s planet-killer, but its power is used completely differently. The idea that this machine could simply disable all of Starfleet – and Earth – without breaking a sweat is already frightening, but when it can’t be reasoned with or even communicated with… that’s outright terrifying. Sometimes the Star Trek franchise can lean too heavily on “nose and forehead” aliens, but the likes of the “whale probe” remind us that the galaxy is a dangerous and sometimes incomprehensible place.

The Voyage Home did something Star Trek has often done: used a sci-fi lens to examine real-world issues. In this case, the loss of biodiversity and humanity’s impact on the environment were in the spotlight. The message was simple: we can’t predict the consequences of even a single species going extinct, and we should do everything we can to preserve biodiversity on Earth. That’s a good message, and it’s presented in a fun, creative story.

Film #5:
The Final Frontier (1989)
Tier: D

Still frame from Star Trek V: The Final Frontier showing Kirk, Spock, and Dr McCoy camping.

I said at the beginning that I wasn’t giving any F-tier rankings, and The Final Frontier is kind of the reason why. I get why folks don’t like it, and I think it has some obvious narrative weaknesses, as well as a smattering of sub-par special effects that make it less visually impressive than other titles in the franchise. But it isn’t a complete cinematic failure on par with something like Baz Luhrmann’s Australia or The Rise of Skywalker, so I think we can safely say that even the least-impressive Star Trek films avoid that ignominious fate!

Star Trek has delved into religion and religious-adjacent subjects before, so the idea of an alien claiming to be the god figure from various cultures isn’t totally out of left-field. But the execution of this storyline leaves something to be desired, and I just don’t think The Final Frontier really knew what it wanted to say or where it wanted to take this heavy idea.

Still frame from Star Trek V: The Final Frontier showing Scotty laying unconsious on the floor.

The film also suffers from a little too much interference from William Shatner, who exercised his contractual right to helm a Star Trek film after Leonard Nimoy had his turn in the director’s chair. Shatner wanted to tell a story that put Kirk – and Kirk alone – centre-stage, as the sole character who could stand up to Spock’s villainous half-brother. Changes were made to the first draft of that story, when Nimoy objected to Spock’s characterisation, but Shatner’s determination to put Kirk front-and-centre still comes across.

I don’t believe that The Final Frontier is irredeemably bad. There are some wonderful moments, too, like the campfire sequence with Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, Scotty’s line “I know this ship like the back of my hand,” and the away mission to Nimbus III. McCoy’s incredibly painful backstory is also one that hits close to home, and has to be one of DeForest Kelley’s best and most emotional scenes with the character. Kirk’s line to Sybok about “needing” his painful and traumatic moments – that they define who he is – is a powerful idea, too. I just feel that, taken as a whole, The Final Frontier misses the mark with some of its storylines and loftier concepts.

Film #6:
The Undiscovered Country (1991)
Tier: A

Still frame from Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country showing Starfleet officers and Klingons at a diplomatic dinner.

After the disappointment of The Final Frontier, it took some persuading for another Star Trek film to be greenlit. In 1991, with The Next Generation well underway and work progressing on spin-off ideas, there were some at Paramount Pictures who argued that Star Trek had moved on from The Original Series and its characters. A proposal to reboot Star Trek with a Starfleet Academy film was seriously considered, but ultimately Gene Roddenberry and others were able to convince the studio to allow the cast one final film to end on. The Undiscovered Country was thus given the green light.

The story here is great, and incredibly timely! The script uses the Federation and Klingons as a metaphor for the end of the Cold War; communists had been swept from power in 1989, and the Soviet Union was itself dissolved just days after the film’s premiere. The story of old rivals finding a path to peace, and old warriors with grudges finding a way to bury the hatchet, was an exceptionally powerful one – even if Gene Roddenberry hated the depictions of Kirk and Starfleet when he was shown an advance copy of the film.

Still frame from Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country showing the attack on Kronos One.

We get to see an exploration of the Klingon Empire, including one of its brutal prison colonies, and how the Klingons of the 23rd Century came to be neighbours and rivals rather than enemies by the time of The Next Generation’s 24th Century. There was even a role for TNG’s Michael Dorn, who played an ancestor of Worf. The Undiscovered Country did a lot to bring Star Trek’s two eras together, and as one crew departed the stage, work on the next expansion of the franchise began. Deep Space Nine would premiere just over a year after The Undiscovered Country had been in cinemas.

The “Praxis effect” – a two-dimensional circular shockwave created by a planet exploding – was named for the destruction of the Klingon moon seen in The Undiscovered Country! In a very real sense, the film’s legacy goes far beyond the Star Trek franchise, with similar visual effects still being used in sci-fi and fantasy to this day. Special effects were great across the board, and The Undiscovered Country also has a fantastic ship battle between the Enterprise, Sulu’s Excelsior, and a cloaked Bird-of-Prey.

Film #7:
Generations (1994)
Tier: S

Still frame from Star Trek: Generations showing Picard and Data in the stellar cartography room.

Is it controversial to say Generations is a good film? Because I honestly think it’s one of the franchise’s best. Bringing Kirk and Picard together was an absolute joy to watch, and I think it came at just the right moment, too – the film represents a handing of the torch from one crew to another. It didn’t come too soon, as this kind of story would’ve overshadowed The Next Generation’s characters before they’d found their feet. But by 1994, I really think the time was right for this kind of epic crossover.

I find Dr Tolian Soran to be an incredible villain, too. His motivations were easily understood, and while he absolutely needed to be stopped… part of me sympathises with him. The presentation of the Nexus as this heaven-like paradise realm, where time has no meaning and your heart’s desires can be made manifest, is the perfect motivation for someone like Soran – whose quest takes on a quasi-religious tone as a result.

Still frame from Star Trek: Generations showing the Nexus approaching Soran, who has his arms raised.

Generations killed off Captain Kirk, drawing a line under Star Trek’s original incarnation. Kirk would, of course, remain important to Star Trek, and it wouldn’t be the final time we’d see a member of his crew on screen. But in that moment it did feel very final – and Kirk’s act of sacrifice to save Picard’s crew and the population of a planet he didn’t even know… it was an intensely emotional sequence.

Generations does a lot to explore the connection between Picard and Guinan, which would go on to be important in Star Trek: Picard, too. It was also a great film for Geordi and Data – the latter receiving his emotion chip and really expanding his programming beyond what he’d been capable of before. All of the main characters got a turn in the spotlight, and there were moments of mystery, emotion, and action throughout this wonderful film.

I wrote a longer piece about this film’s villain, Dr Soran, and you can find it by clicking or tapping here.

Film #8:
First Contact (1996)
Tier: A

Still frame from Star Trek: First Contact showing the Enterprise-E and other Federation vessels firing their weapons.

First Contact is a fantastic film. But I’m docking a couple of points because of one element it introduces that I feel complicates – and crucially, detracts from – one of the franchise’s best, most iconic, and most frightening villainous factions. I’ll have to elaborate on this one day in a standalone piece, because there’s too much to fit into a few sentences right now, but in short: the Borg Queen kind of ruins the Borg for me. Worse, her presence takes away a lot of the Collective’s fear factor – especially when we get to her later appearances. I get it: First Contact is a feature film and it needed to have a single villain for Picard and Data in particular to face off against. But on the whole, I’d say the Borg Queen was not a net positive for the Collective or Star Trek.

But enough about that for now! First Contact re-introduced the Borg in style, depicting a deadly battle in space, and a slow-paced assimilation of the brand-new Enterprise-E. The scenes aboard the Enterprise’s lower decks in particular are incredibly tense; the Borg are far more frightening here than they had been in any of their earlier appearances. And although I have gripes with the Borg Queen as a concept, her scenes with Data and Picard – and the latter’s trauma stemming from his earlier assimilation experience – are all played exceptionally well.

Still frame from Star Trek: First Contact showing Captain Picard on the bridge.

First Contact also did a lot to set the stage for Enterprise – though that wasn’t necessarily the intention at the time! Enterprise does, though, build on what First Contact did with its depiction of Earth and humanity’s first efforts to build a faster-than-light engine. James Cromwell, who played Zephram Cochrane, would even have a cameo in Enterprise’s premiere.

Picard is the real star of the show this time, as he lets his emotions overwhelm him when faced with the Borg’s return. After the episode Family, we didn’t really get much exploration of Picard’s mental state and how he was coping with having been assimilated by the Borg, but First Contact took that as a starting point to tell a story touching on things like post-traumatic stress. It was genuinely interesting – and also left a lot for Star Trek: Picard to build on a quarter of a century later.

Film #9:
Insurrection (1998)
Tier: B

Still frame from Star Trek: Insurrection showing Data wielding a phaser pistol.

Insurrection gets an unfairly bad rap, in my opinion. I like some of the connections in the film to the wider world of Star Trek – nowhere else will you hear Troi and Riker mention the Dominion War, for instance! The Briar Patch is a fun idea both narratively and visually, leading to the crew being cut off from Starfleet HQ. It also sets up a particularly creative starship battle, which as always is something I appreciate!

Star Trek has, on several occasions, had a “badmiral” (a portmanteau of ‘bad’ and ‘admiral’) as a villain, and the concept of a rogue or renegade senior officer is an interesting one. The best villains have some degree of nuance, and Anthony Zerbe does an excellent job conveying this with the character of Admiral Dougherty. Dougherty genuinely believed that he was doing something great for the Federation… even though, with the story being told from the perspective of the Enterprise crew and the Ba’ku, he was the villain.

Still frame from Star Trek: Insurrection showing a close-up of Admiral Dougherty.

The Son’a were an interesting addition to Star Trek, and I’d love to explore a bit more of their culture one day – it’s a shame they’ve never returned. I would posit that the film’s twist – that the Son’a and Ba’ku are the same race – was imperfectly executed, but it was an interesting idea that achieved most of what it was aiming for. It’s also an idea that felt very “Star Trek,” harkening back to The Original Series episodes that had messages about war, race, and so on.

Insurrection has another great villain in Ru’afo, who doesn’t have that same nuance we were talking about, but was delicious to watch nevertheless thanks to an excellent performance from F Murray Abraham. It’s also a great film for Riker – who gets a turn in the captain’s chair during a tense battle, and also sees a starship manoeuvre named after him – and Data, whose “injury” and ethical reset kicks off the entire story. A story about a renegade crew who have to operate outside of the law to do the right thing? That’s something I love – and while I get there are criticisms of the main cast apparently acting “out-of-character,” that’s explained well enough in Insurrection itself.

Film #10:
Nemesis (2002)
Tier: D

Still frame from Star Trek: Nemesis showing Picard and Data, illuminated by a green light.

Walking out of the cinema after the credits rolled, I remember feeling okay about Nemesis. But looking back, particularly after seeing Data being laid to rest in Star Trek: Picard’s first season, the deficiencies of the film are much more apparent. I would argue, with Brent Spiner ageing out of the role by 2002, that killing off Data made some degree of sense as a narrative point. But it wasn’t handled well in Nemesis, with the film rushing past Data’s death, pushing his friends to a “let’s all move on” type of ending that was just weirdly out-of-place and had completely the wrong tone.

Sci-fi tropes and character archetypes will land differently for different folks, and what I’d say about Nemesis’ main villain – played by Tom Hardy in one of his first big-screen roles – is that the idea of a clone of Picard isn’t as silly as it sounds! There’s genuine lore and story here, expanding our understanding of the Romulans and the way they operate, and I really did enjoy that side of the story. Shinzon also makes for a complex character; a human raised by Reman slaves, who has Picard’s DNA but none of his humanity.

Still frame from Star Trek: Nemesis showing the damage to the Enterprise-E's bridge.

Shinzon quite quickly turns to “I’m evil for no reason and I love it” with his characterisation, though, despite some early promise, and by the time the film moves to his plot to attack Earth and the Federation, the plot kind of goes off the rails. Much has been made of director Stuart Baird’s lack of experience and knowledge of Star Trek at the time of the film’s production (he hadn’t so much as watched a single episode of The Next Generation) and I think that comes across in the way the film treats most of the main characters, too.

After Insurrection hadn’t been particularly well-received, and with Enterprise struggling to find an audience, Nemesis didn’t do the Star Trek franchise any favours in 2002. It also seemed – for close to twenty years, anyway – to be a weak and unimpressive ending for The Next Generation characters and Star Trek’s 24th Century setting. As in any Star Trek project, pretty much, there are moments in Nemesis that work, but not enough of them to make the film a success.

Film #11:
Star Trek (2009)
Tier: C

Still frame from Star Trek (2009) showing the Narada on the Enterprise's viewscreen.

I have some conflicting thoughts about 2009’s Star Trek. On the one hand, I was absolutely thrilled to learn of the film’s existence after Enterprise’s cancellation seemed to signal the demise of the entire Star Trek franchise. I did my best from 2006 to support the film while it was in production, and raced to the cinema to see it on the first day it was available. And I would make the case to anyone that Star Trek ’09 is a solid action/sci-fi film, a great introduction to Star Trek for newbies, and a successful title that proved the franchise could still bring in audiences and money at the box office.

But on the other hand, the film’s action-heavy storyline, re-cast classic characters, and fairly basic villain just aren’t what I come to Star Trek for. The new actors were given an exceptionally difficult job and were brave to take it on; I know some Trekkies who, to this day, have refused to watch any of the Kelvin timeline films because of the decision to re-cast Kirk and the crew. Some of the new actors got a lot of criticism before the film had even premiered due to that. Personally, I generally feel they all did a solid job… but there’s always gonna be a sense that they aren’t the “real” Kirk, Spock, Uhura, and so on. Some decisions – like pitting Kirk and Spock against one another, even coming to blows at one stage – really hammers home how different these versions of the characters feel.

Still frame from Star Trek (2009) showing Spock Prime.

Star Trek ’09 is unashamedly a reboot, and if you meet it where it is and you’re able to accept that, I think there’s a good time to be had with at least parts of it. But as someone who’d been a Trekkie for close to twenty years when the film premiered, who’d been immersed in the world of The Next Generation era in particular… I wasn’t really interested in a reboot. After Enterprise, I wanted to see Star Trek move its timeline forward again, not stepping back to re-cast classic characters for a pretty basic action story.

All that being said, I appreciate what Star Trek ’09 did for the franchise. If this film hadn’t found an audience and proved to studio executives that there was still life in Star Trek and still stories to tell here, that would’ve almost certainly been the end of the franchise, and I doubt we’d have seen Lower Decks, Strange New Worlds, and the rest of modern Star Trek. Keeping the flag flying for the franchise after it had burned out on the small screen is the real legacy of Star Trek ’09 – at least for me.

Film #12:
Into Darkness (2013)
Tier: B

Cropped promotional poster for Star Trek Into Darkness.

I would argue that Into Darkness is the high-water mark of the Kelvin timeline. There are still issues with the characters, some contrivances with the story, and so on… but the film’s script is generally much stronger than either of the other Kelvin films. Not only that, but this particular story – featuring notorious villain Khan and a “badmiral” scheming from within Starfleet itself – lends itself much more to the kind of action-packed film that JJ Abrams wanted to make.

Captain Pike’s death in Into Darkness genuinely hit me – it was unexpected in the moment, and Kirk’s reaction to the loss of someone he viewed as a surrogate father figure was truly heartbreaking. It’s definitely one of the most powerful moments for this version of the character, and the way it spurs on the plot was good, too. I also liked the callback to Star Trek ’09 with the “transwarp beaming” idea returning, this time as a problem to be overcome.

Still frame from Star Trek Into Darkness showing Khan and Kirk.

If you were online and involved in Star Trek discussion groups and forums circa 2011-2013, you would’ve almost certainly had Into Darkness’ big reveal spoiled for you ahead of time. Unfortunately, fans correctly guessed that Benedict Cumberbatch would be playing the legendary Khan – and going into the film with that expectation certainly put a downer on the scene where Kirk learns the truth. I always prefer to see films un-spoiled, but this rumour was everywhere at the time, so it was unavoidable.

For a variety of reasons, this story just feels stronger and, most importantly, better-suited to these characters and this style of film. Into Darkness is a better film as a result, with a consistent tone, understandable character motivations, and a pair of solidly entertaining villains. There are some contrived moments – and I don’t think Kirk’s sacrifice and “death” works anywhere near as well as Spock’s did in The Wrath of Khan, which Into Darkness tries to emulate in more ways than one – but on the whole, it’s not a bad film by any stretch.

Film #13:
Beyond (2016)
Tier: C

Still frame from Star Trek Beyond showing Kirk with a seatbelt on.

Penned by Scotty actor Simon Pegg, Beyond was a genuine, well-intentioned attempt to bring the Kelvin timeline films slightly closer to “classic Star Trek” in terms of tone and themes, and I really do admire the effort. There are moments that link up with Star Trek’s past – most notably Enterprise – and parts of the film, particularly its opening scenes, succeed at recreating at least some of that “mission of exploration” feeling that the other Kelvin timeline films didn’t spend even a second on.

But there are some flaws and weaknesses, though. The destruction of the Enterprise is by far the weakest loss of a ship in the franchise, as we just don’t have anywhere near as much attachment to it as we did to the original Enterprise, the Enterprise-D, and other ships that have been destroyed. The sequence was tense, particularly as the crew rushed to their escape pods, but the emotional weight of the moment didn’t ring true for me.

Still frame from Star Trek Beyond showing a Federation security team aboard the Enterprise.

I felt that an actor of Idris Elba’s calibre was also squandered on a pretty basic “I’m mean and I hate everyone” type of villain. Krall had potential – the “lost” captain who felt abandoned by Starfleet and the Federation, and whose xenophobic and war-like traits were a century or more out of date. But the film didn’t do enough with Krall, and the big reveal that this alien-looking alien was, in fact, a human didn’t really stick the landing. Again, it was interesting in theory but kind of wasted by the time it came to the screen.

I might be alone in this, but I detest the name “Jaylah” for the film’s new character. A homonym of “J-Law” – the tabloid nickname given to American actress Jennifer Lawrence, who was a big star at the time thanks to her role in The Hunger Games – this reference just felt cringeworthy and unnecessary. I’m happy for Star Trek to take inspiration from a wide range of other films, including the likes of The Hunger Games, but don’t stoop to this level when it comes to character naming. It’s just… well, it’s pretty pathetic, to be honest.

I couldn’t end this section without also noting that Beyond was rather overshadowed by the deaths of Leonard Nimoy and Anton Yelchin in the months leading up to its premiere.

Film #14:
Section 31 (2025)
Tier: C

Still frame from Star Trek: Section 31 showing a trio of main characters.

You have to try to meet Section 31 where it is. It’s a B-movie; the Star Trek equivalent of The Fast and the Furious or Transformers, complete with a cookie-cutter plot, some pretty mindless action, and plenty of tropes of both action flicks and spy movies. Once I realised that that’s what I was watching… I just kind of went with it. On those terms, I found Section 31 to be just fine.

Where my disappointment comes in is in the wasted potential. There was scope for Section 31 to be the kind of film that brings new eyes to Star Trek for the first time, genuinely expanding the fan community by making what can feel like a nerdy and overcomplicated franchise approachable. I don’t believe Section 31 came close to achieving that goal, unfortunately. And from my perspective, that felt like the biggest point in its favour and a key reason for making it.

Still frame from Star Trek: Section 31 showing Sahar and Fuzz fighting.

I would also argue that Georgiou’s arc in Section 31 was pretty repetitive, dragging up her Mirror Universe origin and forcing her through a story that we’d already seen a lot of in Discovery. Dragging her back from the more complex character we’d started to see so she could re-start that arc wasn’t great. And that’s before we get into the weeds on whether a redemption story for someone at least as evil and despotic as Star Wars’ Emperor Palpatine was even possible, let alone successfully executed in Section 31.

There are also gripes with how disconnected this film feels from the rest of Star Trek, with the barest of references and none of the franchise’s visual language present. If, however, you can set most of that aside… there are fun moments hiding under the surface. And as I said a moment ago, if you can meet Section 31 where it is, on its own terms, I think it’s a perfectly adequate B-movie.

I have a two-part review of Section 31. You can find the non-spoiler part by clicking or tapping here and the part containing story spoilers by clicking or tapping here.

So that’s it!

We’ve put all fourteen Star Trek films into a tier list. So let’s take a look and see how we did:

The finished tier list with all fourteen Star Trek films.

Well, I hope that was worth it! As you can see, we have more films in the upper tiers than the lower ones, and even the “worst” Star Trek films still have redeeming qualities – at least in my opinion.

I wanted to put this list together after Section 31 had premiered, updating my older list to include the new film. This piece almost certainly concludes my Section 31 coverage for the foreseeable future, as I really don’t have much more to say about the made-for-streaming movie at this point. If you’ve been following my coverage of Section 31, thank you! I hope you’ve found my take to be interesting.

Still frame from Star Trek: The Motion Picture showing the Enterprise at warp.
The USS Enterprise at warp.

At time of writing, there are supposedly two Star Trek films in pre-production or at least being worked on in some capacity. The first is a Beyond sequel, bringing back the Kelvin timeline cast for another outing. And the second is supposedly set in between Enterprise and Star Trek ’09, perhaps serving as a kind of Kelvin timeline prequel. You can read my thoughts on that idea by clicking or tapping here.

There have been other film proposals pitched over the years. Sir Patrick Stewart teased fans in early 2024 with news of a Picard movie idea, but I don’t think anything came of that. For my money, I’d like to see Paramount do more with the TV movie format, using it to tell one-off stories that wouldn’t necessarily fit anywhere else in the franchise. With new sets having been constructed, and the AR wall too, there are almost no limits on the kinds of stories that could be told as one-off specials – and the budget for such a production would be lower than a feature film, too! With Section 31 proving to be a disappointment, though, I’m not sure whether that’ll ever happen.

Still frame from Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country showing two starships, a planet, and a star.
The Enterprise and the Excelsior in orbit over Khitomer.

So I hope this has been a bit of fun! Beginning with Generations, I watched every Star Trek film at the cinema. Unfortunately, due to my health, I won’t be able to do that in future – which is why I enjoyed having Section 31 as a TV movie! But if there ever is another full-length Star Trek film, I’ll do my best to support it here on the website.

Until next time… Live Long and Prosper!


Most of the Star Trek films are available to stream on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available. The first thirteen films are also available on Blu-ray and DVD, and a Blu-ray release of Section 31 is planned. The Star Trek franchise – including all films and properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

Another Star Trek Film Announcement?

Paramount has tried and failed multiple times to get a sequel to 2016’s Star Trek Beyond into production… so it was a surprise to learn that the corporation has tapped yet another writer and director to work on a script. I’m beginning to lose count, but if we don’t include the Section 31 TV movie and disregard – for now – Sir Patrick Stewart’s Picard movie concept/pitch that I talked about the other day… is this the fifth time Paramount has announced a new Star Trek film in just the last couple of years? Or is it the sixth?

At this point, I’m a die-hard sceptic, unfortunately. There have been so many false starts, premature announcements, and just straight-up failures with this project that even when I’m halfway through watching the film I’ll still be doubting its existence! Paramount’s commitment to making a new Star Trek film may be rock solid, but the corporation’s basic competence is in serious question. So I guess what I’ll say is this: I’ll believe it when I see it!

A behind-the-scenes photo from Star Trek Into Darkness showing an explosion.
An explosive moment during filming on Star Trek Into Darkness.

It feels odd to be covering two separate Star Trek films just days apart. I’m loathe to call Sir Patrick Stewart’s comments about a hypothetical Picard film an “announcement,” because the more I’ve watched his interview, the less convinced I am that the script he was hyping up is anything more than a speculative pitch. But even so, 2024 has been kick-started with some interesting Star Trek news!

One thing that seems clear from Paramount is that neither of the two Star Trek films currently in development are connected to Picard. One is the repeatedly-failed Beyond sequel, and the latest announcement sounds like it could be a prequel – or perhaps a film set in between Enterprise and 2009’s Star Trek whose place in the timeline will undoubtedly prove controversial! But are either of those concepts worth pursuing? And with Paramount’s dire financial situation and a potential takeover of the company happening later this year… will any of these hypothetical films ever make it to screen?

Director JJ Abrams and actor Chris Pine in a behind-the-scenes photo from Star Trek (2009).
Director JJ Abrams and Kirk actor Chris Pine during work on 2009’s Star Trek.

The last time we talked about a potential Beyond sequel, I had this to say:

“I don’t think we still need the Kelvin timeline. And if I were in the room, I’d argue that there are better ways for Paramount to spend money on Star Trek than greenlighting a new film starring this cast…”

That was almost a year ago… and honestly, I don’t think much has changed since then – at least not in terms of my attitude to a new Kelvin timeline film, be it a sequel or prequel.

Concept art of the USS Enterprise from production on Star Trek (2009).
Concept art of the Kelvin timeline’s USS Enterprise.

Midway through 2023 I began to feel burned out on Star Trek. Part of the reason for that is the complicated, downright convoluted nature of the franchise, with different shows all being set in different periods along the timeline. There has been a lot of Star Trek over the past couple of years, and franchise fatigue is definitely in danger of setting in. Given all of that, there’s even less space for another new film with new characters – or different variants of current characters – than there was before.

What Star Trek needs more than anything else is space to cool off. The past few years have been frenzied, with Paramount seemingly greenlighting any idea that came along with little regard for how oversaturated the franchise has gotten, nor for how well the different shows work together. If Star Trek is to survive much longer, then producing fewer shows and films – perhaps with a tighter focus on a single setting and time period – is what’s needed. This scattershot approach of different parallel realities and eras just adds to the confusion of Star Trek as a whole and makes it difficult – if not impossible – to bring new fans on board. And as I’ve said countless times before: that’s vital to the franchise’s future prospects.

The logo of the Paramount corporation.
Paramount has arguably mishandled Star Trek over the past few years.

The Kelvin timeline served a purpose in the late 2000s and early 2010s. Star Trek and Into Darkness proved definitively that audiences hadn’t entirely fallen out of love with Star Trek – and that the franchise could still do new things even after decades in production. Without the Kelvin timeline films it’s hard to see how Discovery and the rest of modern Star Trek would have been possible. So I don’t want to diminish or disregard the Kelvin films and their place in the history of Star Trek.

However, that’s not the question before us right now. Instead, we need to seriously evaluate whether or not there’s a place for a new Kelvin film in 2024. When considering everything that Star Trek has done since 2016 – which is almost 200 episodes of television across five-and-a-half different shows, lest we forget – what role could a new Kelvin film play? I’m not sure there’s a place for one film in that timeline, let alone two.

Cropped still frame from Star Trek (2009) highlighting the name of the USS Kelvin.
The Kelvin timeline is named for the USS Kelvin.

The Kelvin timeline’s big selling point – from a corporate point of view, at least – is its profitability. Although Beyond was considered a disappointment, it still brought in money at the box office, and Into Darkness is the Star Trek franchise’s highest-grossing film. If Paramount is worried about Star Trek paying its way, I can see the appeal a new Kelvin film might have to a faceless suit in a boardroom.

As well-received as Strange New Worlds and Picard have been, they haven’t been able to drag Paramount Plus across the line and into profitable territory. A lot of Trekkies and viewers liked what they saw, but that hasn’t translated into Paramount Plus becoming a must-have subscription. If a new film were to prove successful and bring in millions at the box office, it could shore up Paramount’s finances in the short-term… as well as the corporation’s commitment to Star Trek. That might be the single biggest point in its favour from my point of view!

Promo photo of Anson Mount as Captain Pike in Star Trek: Strange New Worlds.
Strange New Worlds has been well-received by many Star Trek fans.

But when I think about what I’d like to see most of all from Star Trek, a new Kelvin film doesn’t even break into the top ten… or top twenty. There have been some interesting pitches and ideas over the past few years, from Discovery spin-offs to animated shorts. Right now, I’m more interested to see Star Trek explore more of the Picard era – the early 25th Century. That feels like something that has huge potential and could really drive the franchise forward – comparable, in some respects, to what The Next Generation and the other Star Trek shows of the ’90s did.

With the fan campaign for Legacy still doing the rounds and still being talked about almost a year after Picard ended, that’s where I’d choose to focus my energy if I had a foot in the door of the Paramount boardroom! But even if Legacy couldn’t go ahead as currently envisioned, the Picard era is still ripe for further exploration and feels like the right setting for future Star Trek projects.

Still frame from Star Trek: Picard showing the USS Titan.
A new series or TV movie set in the Picard era is very appealing.

So I guess that’s where I’m at. In a perfect world – one where the Star Trek franchise had limitless budgets and creative freedom – I’d say go for it. But when budgets are constrained and there isn’t the time or money to do everything, priorities have to be set – and speaking for myself, as a Trekkie, the Kelvin timeline just doesn’t feel necessary. There’s no compelling reason to return there, and with several prominent characters also taking part in Strange New Worlds – a series that I sincerely hope will continue beyond its third season for several more years – there’s also a narrative risk. Competing versions of the same character could trip over one another, or come across as repetitive and having nothing new to say.

On the practical side of things, after so many false starts and cock-ups I have absolutely no faith in Paramount any more. The corporation has screwed up these announcements multiple times, including in 2022 when a humiliating un-announcement had to be made just days after one of the aborted Beyond sequel ideas had been officially put on the schedule. I’m not convinced at this stage that either of the two films allegedly in development will see a release – or even start filming.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me six times in a row with the same announcement? I’m not even sure there’s an expression for that!

Zachary Quinto (Spock) and Chris Pine (Kirk) in a promo photo for Star Trek (2009).
Spock and Kirk in a promo photo for 2009’s Star Trek.

If you want to get excited and hyped at the idea of Star Trek returning to the big screen after the longest-ever gap in between films, I feel ya. I’d love to be able to jump on board the hype train and ride it all the way to Starfleet Headquarters! But Paramount has sapped my faith over the past couple of years, and I’m at a point where I don’t have any confidence in the corporation or any announcements it makes. I genuinely don’t know whether this latest Star Trek film will even come close to entering production.

Despite my reservations about both Paramount as a whole and a Beyond sequel or prequel as narrative concepts, I will do my best to talk about them here on the website. If there’s big news, casting details, or a trailer, I hope you’ll join me for my thoughts and analysis. Just because a new film set in the Kelvin timeline wouldn’t be my first choice doesn’t mean I won’t treat it fairly and give it a chance to impress me.

Still crossing my fingers for that Legacy announcement, though!

The Star Trek films should be available to stream on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the service is available, and are also available on DVD and Blu-ray. The Star Trek franchise – including all films and properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

Do we still need the Kelvin timeline?

Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for the Kelvin timeline films: Star Trek, Star Trek Into Darkness, and Star Trek Beyond. Spoilers are also present for Star Trek: Strange New Worlds.

One of the worst things to happen to the Star Trek franchise last year was the disastrous announcement and rapid un-announcement of a sequel to 2016’s Star Trek Beyond. The film quickly fell apart as it became clear that Paramount had done nothing to secure the main cast, director, or even schedule filming dates and plan location shoots.

But it wasn’t bad for the Star Trek franchise because I desperately wanted to see a new Kelvin timeline film. In fact, I don’t know of any Trekkies in my immediate circle who would say that they’re desperate to get back to the Kelvin timeline! The reason why it was such a disaster is how damaging a mess like this is for Star Trek as a brand.

Promo art for 2009’s Star Trek.

From the point of view of fans and the franchise’s broader audience, this kind of situation might not seem like a big deal, and I get that. But for folks who work in the entertainment industry, seeing how poorly Paramount handled this is going to have longer-term implications.

A sequel to Star Trek Beyond has failed to get off the ground for basically seven years at this point. More than one script that would have brought back the Kelvin crew has been considered, and pre-production has begun at least twice, yet the film hasn’t materialised. The chaos last year, with the film being pulled from schedules just a few weeks after its announcement, is just the latest in a long line of blunders from Paramount – and anyone working in Hollywood, whether they’re a lowly production assistant or a talented, well-known director, is now going to be thinking twice about attaching themselves to a disorganised corporation that’s repeatedly failed to make this film.

Paramount really screwed this up.

Matt Shakman, who had previously worked on WandaVision for Marvel and has also directed episodes of Game of Thrones, had been tapped by Paramount to sit in the director’s chair, but he exited the project when things fell apart last year. Recent comments that Shakman made have seemed to suggest that a Star Trek Beyond sequel may still be in the works, and several outlets have seized upon this news to begin speculating about what may or may not be happening behind the scenes.

But as you might’ve guessed from the title of this article, I’m not convinced that there’s a place for the Kelvin timeline any more. Maybe it’s time to leave it behind, and put the considerable money that would’ve been thrown its way into other projects.

Is it time to bid farewell to these versions of the characters?

More Star Trek is always a good thing, and that’s the caveat I will always give whenever we have discussions like this! If there is to be a new Kelvin film, I’ll definitely tune in when it comes to streaming or Blu-ray (my health prevents me from taking trips to the cinema any more, regrettably). It’s also worth noting that when Star Trek goes to the cinema it tends to pick up a much bigger audience than it does on television or streaming – and reaching out beyond the existing fandom and viewer base has to be considered a priority for Paramount in the months and years ahead.

With those points in mind, though, if I were in charge of the franchise for Paramount, a fourth Kelvin timeline film is categorically not the project I would choose to give the green light to.

Sorry, captain.

Since Beyond premiered in 2016, we’ve had 144 episodes of Star Trek across six different productions – if you count Short Treks, that is. The Star Trek universe has massively expanded to include a huge variety of new shows set in different eras, appealing to diverse audiences, and with varying styles. I’m just not sure where the Kelvin timeline fits in with everything else Star Trek is currently doing – and in addition, adding an alternate timeline into the mix when the franchise is already playing in so many different time periods risks making Star Trek look even more complicated and convoluted than it already does.

Strange New Worlds has picked up several characters who are also present in the Kelvin timeline, and there’s a real risk that these two projects would trip over one another – or at least tread on each other’s toes. If I had to choose only one set of these recast or reimagined characters to stick with, I’d definitely choose the Strange New Worlds versions; Season 1 was absolutely outstanding, and seeing where Captain Pike and the crew will go next is one of my most-anticipated entertainment experiences of the year.

Strange New Worlds is a fantastic series; the high-water mark of modern Star Trek.

The Kelvin timeline served a purpose in 2009 when its first instalment premiered. It rebooted things, reimagined Star Trek for a new century, and stripped away some of the more niche and convoluted aspects of a more than forty-year-old franchise to ensure it would appeal to the widest possible audience. And it succeeded in that regard, with all three films turning a healthy profit and proving definitively that there was still life in a franchise that many had written off.

Without the Kelvin timeline, it’s hard to see how we’d have gotten Discovery, Picard, and the modern Star Trek productions that we’re continuing to enjoy, so we absolutely owe it a debt of gratitude for what it accomplished. But its original purpose has long since evaporated, with the idea of seeing “young” Kirk and Spock in their Academy days having been replaced by taking a look at their five-year mission. With Strange New Worlds also including Spock, Uhura, and even Kirk himself in some capacity, I just don’t see where their Kelvin counterparts fit any more.

Seeing Kirk and co. at the Academy was one of the original concepts present in the Kelvin timeline.

As we can infer from Paramount’s failure to negotiate contracts with the Kelvin stars, several of them are probably beyond the reach of the corporation’s current budget. Zoë Saldaña has found fame in Avatar and the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Chris Pine has been in Wonder Woman for DC, among other roles, and Karl Urban has received praise for his role in The Boys on Amazon Prime Video. While these people weren’t “unknowns” in 2009 by any means, their star power has risen, and with it, the money they’d expect to receive for a film like this has also increased.

A new Kelvin timeline film would be an expensive undertaking – far more expensive even than Into Darkness, which holds the franchise record with an approximate $190 million budget.

The Kelvin cast with JJ Abrams at the Star Trek Beyond premiere in 2016.
Image Credit: StarTrek.com

As a comparison, Season 3 of Picard is estimated to have cost Paramount somewhere in the region of $9 million per episode, and Discovery is also somewhere in the $8-9 million per episode range. Some quick maths tells us that, even if the new Kelvin timeline film were to cost the same as Into Darkness and not a penny more, it would still be more expensive than producing two ten-episode seasons of modern Star Trek shows.

Paramount does not have unlimited funds! And even when compared to the likes of Disney, Amazon, and Netflix, Paramount has to be a lot more careful with where it spends its money. I’d very much rather have two seasons of modern Star Trek than one new Kelvin timeline film – especially if those seasons are going to be anywhere near as good as Strange New Worlds Season 1 was!

Paramount doesn’t have money to burn…

It feels like the abandoned film helmed by Matt Shakman was the Kelvin timeline’s last realistic chance at a revival. Its collapse has caused all sorts of problems for the Star Trek franchise, especially with ambitions to return to the cinema still being held by Paramount, and those issues shouldn’t be overlooked. But it may be for the best in the long run.

It’s true that Beyond teased a sequel in its final moments, with Kirk and his crew looking out as the Enterprise-A was being constructed. There will be some fans who truly wanted to see where those versions of the characters might go next. But with Star Trek seemingly finding its feet again on the small screen, and having firmly returned to the prime timeline, I just don’t think there’s a place for it any more.

Beyond definitely teased a continuation of the Kelvin story.

When the Beyond sequel was announced last year, it didn’t exactly light up the board, even within the Star Trek fan community. There was chatter and interest, of course, but there wasn’t the kind of hype bubble that there was in 2007-08, for example, when the first film was in production. Partly that’s because Star Trek as a whole is right on the cusp of oversaturation and franchise fatigue, with 51 episodes being broadcast in 2022 alone. But partly, it must be said, it’s because there was just never a whole lot of excitement for the Kelvin timeline to begin with.

I’d watch a new Kelvin timeline film… but I wouldn’t be wildly excited about in the way I am for Strange New Worlds Season 2, for example. And even if the film managed to pull in a decent audience at the box office, these versions of the characters are tried and tested by now. The chances of Star Trek 4 bringing in scores of new viewers to the franchise for the first time is slim.

What kind of audience numbers would a new Kelvin film bring in?

The Kelvin timeline served a purpose in the 2000s and 2010s. The trilogy did a lot of good, and paved the way for the success Star Trek is currently enjoying. But it’s also difficult to see how to integrate it into the franchise as it currently exists – it’s off to one side in its own little narrative box. And because several of its characters are now part of Strange New Worlds, there’s even a danger that it could feel repetitive to bring back the likes of Spock and Uhura.

So to answer the question I posed at the beginning: no. I don’t think we still need the Kelvin timeline. And if I were in the room, I’d argue that there are better ways for Paramount to spend money on Star Trek than greenlighting a new film starring this cast – whether that means new seasons of television or alternative pitches for feature films.

The crew in Beyond.

The damage done to Star Trek as a whole by the film’s collapse last year can’t be overstated, and may take time to fully appear. Paramount needs to get a grip, because mistakes like that can’t afford to happen again. But maybe it will be for the best. The money that could have been spent on a sequel to Beyond can be reallocated… and with no new live-action Star Trek projects currently announced, that could mean that the likes of Discovery and Strange New Worlds will be able to continue for an extra season apiece.

There are reportedly other feature film pitches that Paramount is working on, and the Beyond sequel was one of two that were supposedly announced over the last couple of years. Whether the other film, written by Discovery and Short Treks writer and producer Kalinda Vazquez, is still going ahead… who can say? Paramount’s disorganisation and chaos is boundless, it seems!

Regardless, if there’s news about a Beyond sequel or any other Star Trek feature films in the months ahead, I’ll be sure to take a look at it here on the website. So I hope you’ll stay tuned!

The Star Trek films should be available to stream on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the service is available, and are also available on DVD and Blu-ray. The Star Trek franchise – including all films and properties discussed above – is the copyright of Paramount Global. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.