Star Trek The Motion Picture was important but the franchise would've happened with or without it

When it comes to Star Trek: The Motion Picture, few things in franchise history can be labeled both a success and a failure. That just happens to be the case with this film, however. It pushed the bounds of visual expectations at the time, giving audiences a sight spectacle that few other films were capable of at the time.

Yet, the story and overall energy of the film felt detached from what fans had expected from Star Trek's first foray into the world of cinema. The push was for it to be more grand, like Star Wars: A New Hope, and that was never Star Trek's bag.

It did well enough to warrant a sequel but the tone and perception of the second film, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, was far more in line with what fans expected from a Star Trek film.

The short-falls of the film are made even more abundant when you remember that the film was basically a remodified version of the series Gene Roddenberry wanted to make in the 1970s, nicknamed Star Trek: Phase II. Just about every new character and starting plot point of that series made it into the film, making it a truncated experience of what we could've had if it made it to television.

This was a franchise that always ended up surviving somehow, so when people like Inverse claim that Star Trek the Motion Picture was why we have such an expanded universe, I'm forced to push back on that idea.

Before the film, there were three shows; The Original Series, the Animated Series, and the failed Phase II concept. Had there not been a featured film, there likely would've been a fourth show eventually. After all, it was brought back like it was in the 1970s due to the fan support around them. Be it a film or another show, there would've been new Star Trek content in the late '70s and early '80s come hell or high water.

Maybe things don't go the same way that they did in reality. Maybe we don't get six films and then The Next Generation era of shows and films. Maybe it's another show or film franchise that Star Trek launches that catches on with fans.

But there would've been something, eventually. Franchises as popular and big as Star Trek never have just "one" film or show that saves or expands the franchise. After all, look at Battlestar Galactica or V, both cult-level shows and both got brought back some 20 years later for better renditions.

Star Wars keeps producing major shows and films after major shows and films. Star Trek was a property fans were clamoring for in droves in the 70s, which is why Phase II and then The Motion Picture were eventually made. So the idea that the first Star Trek film was why we got everything after that we did is a bit of a fallacy.

We would've gotten plenty of Star Trek content following the film, it just might have been a bit different from what we did get due to the timeline being truncated some. Still, it likely would've been very good regardless of what we got.

The Motion Picture deserves its praise for the visuals they created at the time but their impact on the larger direction of Star Trek is debatable at best.