Title Possibly Revealed?

That was a great title. It let you know immediately that the story was starting over again, and it wasn't (thankfully) picking up where Batman and Robin horribly left off. It was simple, to the point, and gave you a good idea of what to expect (a new beginning/retelling of a classic story). There was nothing more anyone could want.

Well, they're not going to please everyone with Star Trek Into Darkness, so I guess it is what it is. It just seems vague, though.

 

Oh believe me, I know what their comment sections are like. I hung in there for a while. I should have known better when the first ever comment I made there was attacked because it was "too nice." That would be funny if I were joking, but I'm not. People squabbling like chickens over a grain of feed... And if you stay there long enough, they get you clucking and pecking too... I'm not trying to say anything too bad because there are a handful of nice and reasonable posters there--I'm just saying I understand how and why a simple colon would and could be the cause of the next apocalypse there. That is all.

Cool, thank you.

 

It's a show called Star Trek.

About a space station.

It's pretty much the most obvious example in the various colon titles where the 'Star Trek' bit was just a franchise signifier.

Not that I'm wild about the actual title either. Deep Space what, exactly? I suppose calling the show Starbase Nine just sounded lame or whatever.

The Cardassian name was Terok Nor. The name Deep Space Nine was the Federation's designation as other Starfleet stations with similar names have been mentioned - including Deep Space Five, which has the same model as Regula One. I believe DS5 is the only other one that's been seen, though.

 

Starbase Nine does sound lame as a title. I dunno, I'm sure they're called something, but when I think of a starbase, I think of a research outpost or the docking stations that the starships, like Enterprise, go to and land on in space.

Re: Star Trek about a Space station. There was enough "star trekking" that happened in the series, but by this time, I think they could afford to explore the journey within. Everything about the Federation couldn't just be fancy starships exploring. This was a great way to see what else the Federation does, and how they do it. It's also nice to see how someone becomes a captain instead of just starting out the series with a captain on a luxurious ship.

I also like the Deep Space aspect of it because it lets you know that this is far away from home into the deep, and that works on many figurative levels as well. Great title. Great show.

Thank you. I knew that it was called Terok Nor under the Cardassians, but I forgot about the other Deep Space stations. Obviously, there would be 1-8.

 

Or it could be about..

Spoiler: Possible Trek 2 spoilers

Gary Mitchell going blind!

 

That much is for certain. I'm not sure how I feel about this possible title, save for the fact it seems to go in the opposite direction of what Pine was indicating just days ago.

If I had to guess, this is a red herring. They may have a title selected and domains secured, but most likely not for this.

 

Oh definitely. It's not criticism of DS9 as a series, I enjoyed the hell out of that show.

But the only reason Star Trek is in the title is because it's part of the same franchise as The Next Generation and the original show. Unlike those programs, it's not about star trekking, so that part of the title is purely a brand label.

I mean it's a bit like if there were shows called Cheers: Frasier or Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Angel.

 

Well no one actually believed that Star War ep 2 was really going to be titled "Attack of the Clones" when it first leaked.

 

Star Trek Into Darkness is a stupid title.

At least one random poster is going to want to quote the above, twist it into something else, and read into it what's not there. So let me cut them off at the pass.

Don't Tell Mom the Babysitter's Dead is a stupid title. It also happens to be one of my favorite movies.

I could think Star Trek Into Darkness is the best Trek movie ever made, the best sci-fi movie ever made, and the best movie in general ever made -- I won't but let's say I did for the sake of argument -- but I'll still think it's a stupid title.

Someone, somewhere, recommended Trek Into Darkness. That would've been better.

 

Well, BABYLON 5 was already taken ... kidding, kidding. Not really trying to dredge up that old argument.

As for the new title, I kinda like it. As I said in another thread, I'd have preferred a title without STAR TREK in it. Something akin to THE DARK KNIGHT or THE MAN OF STEEL. Maybe, WHERE NO MAN ... or BOLDLY GO or THE FINAL FRONTIER.

 

They didn't. Sources around them did though. Paramount has already purchased domain names such as www.startrekintodarkness.com

 

I'm warming to this name but I might even love it if they gave us a colon.

Of course you don't have colons in domain names SO..

 

What? That's a fantastic title. It's original, memorable, fits the movie to a tee, and all while conveying far more about its subject than the vast majority of titles manage to do.

Many (good)titles can be taken different ways, but there's no mistaking the snarky humor found in "Don't Tell Mom the Babysitter's Dead," and most people will instantly have a vague notion of kids disobeying their parents while away.

If you want good titles to compare to, you can start right here Mister.

 

Point taken.

Even so, the essence of my point still stands.

I just thought I'd throw it out there because I remember how chest-thumpy this forum used to be a few years ago. And I always maintained that that type of environment drove away a lot more traffic than it brought in. Even if the traffic was good, I think it could've been even higher if people didn't have to worry about all the constant headaches and harassment. In my view, it's best not to take a chance and make sure I have the bases covered.

If things have changed around here since then, and we don't always have to have sheilds up, then that's great.

 

Though I don't think this title is very original or catching, I can't say I'm too bothered with it, honestly, I'm just a little worried about seeing Star Trek go the way of the dumbed-down blockbuster, so catchy title or not, I hope it will be a good story and a movie that I can enjoy watching.

 

I'm not blown away by the title. It seems a bit to punny, it kinda reminds me of the cutesyness of "you're all astronauts on some kind of star trek". It works better with a colon, and it won't reflect the quality of the movie. It's good to have some news at any rate.

 

It seems many of you still haven't understood the point made many times by the writers that the whole problem with the colon thing was that it indicated (as in many other franchises too) that this is "Star Trek: Yet Another One". How many times have we seen something like "Underworld: Apocalypse" or "Resident Evil: Retribution" (I'm making these up, because they're all so interchangeable)?

Problem with Trek (vis-a-vis the Batman/Dark Knight title issue) is that Trek has no instantly memorable alternate moniker that hasn't been used: Enterprise was an (unpopular) TV show. The Final Frontier was an (unpopular) film. And the other ideas floating around, To Boldly Go? Generic. Where No Man Has Gone Before? Maybe, but not if the movie does indeed feature Gary Mitchell, don't you think?

Star Trek Into Darkness I like as a middle ground. Somewhat forced, yes. But since trek is a rough synonym of journey and there is such an expression as "journey into darkness", why not?

 

Whats the betting an eclipse will feature heavily in the posters/logos etc?