Lindelof talks title, and time gap

Star Trek: What is Brain?

 

Star Trek's The Life of Brain.

 

I noticed when I read the article I didn't see anything about a time Gap, and someone posted after that, saying they didn't see anything about a time Gap. Did anyone find anything about a Time Gap in this article?

 

Not in the article but in the video of the interview he said that the time gap is significantly less than the real life gap between movies.

 

Actually, not too long ago I saw an old trailer for Star Trek Generations 2, which apparently was, at one time, thought to be the title of First Contact, so you bring up a very good point there with Generations. Would Star Trek Generations 2 been a better title than First Contact??

 

Certainly not. Generations was called that because it was the meeting of two generations, Kirk's and Picard's. FC was a pure TNG-era movie, so the title wouldn't have worked there. (Although I guess you could make a case that it was a meeting between Picard's generation and Cochrane's, but that's a huge reach, and it loses the resonance with the TNG title since it's not about different generations of Enterprise crew specifically.)

And as a rule I'm not fond of movie titles that are just an earlier film's title with a number after it. I think it's lazy. To me, every story deserves its own title.

 

Trekkin'

 

You Got Kirk'd

 

Jim and Carol, A Love Story

Reel in the teeny-bopper crowd.

 

Star Trek: The Wrath of Lens Flare.

 

Is this an example of colonic irritation?

 

For the most part, this thread made me laugh; love the title ideas!

Just wanted to jump in to say that I read somewhere (probably on Memory Alpha) that when TVH was released in theaters in Australia, they titled it literally "The Voyage Home" and didn't include "Star Trek" or "Star Trek IV" on any of the marketing material. Apparently, this was done to broaden the appeal of the movie to general audiences rather than just fans of Star Trek. I can see this method being put to use today, also. I feel like with this reboot, the filmmakers are trying to appeal to everyone, not just to fans of the franchise. So the elimination of "Star Trek," or at least the act of downplaying it so it's not an integral part of the title, sounds plausible.

I do think that whatever title is chosen, it should be reflective of the theme of the film; so something like "Starship Enterprise" or a variation of it feels too vague and general.

 

So was "The Dark Knight," but it worked for the movie.

 

Not at all. "The Dark Knight" is appropriate in at least three ways: 1) He took on the mantle of a Knight. 2) He and the movie were "dark" in their own ways. 3) He became a villain of sorts.

"Starship Enterprise" on the other hand conveys nothing more than is already known.

 

^ Did that little prologue sequence in the VHS UK/Europe release ever wind up included in any US tapes? I ask because my grandmother had a blank tape she recorded the film with at some point; I remember the label being "Star Trek The One With The Whales" (my non-Trekkie mother jotted that one down when I was, like, a year old) and I specifically recall the prologue sequence.

It's possible my memory is playing tricks with me, but I've definitely seen that prologue, and I could swear it was on that tape, which I watched over and over again as a kid.

 

You know, I sometimes think Paramount should just break down and retitle Movie #4 "Star Trek: The One with the Whales" since that's how much pretty the entire world refers to it. Only hardcore Trekkies know that the actual title is "The Voyage Home."

 

^ This! LoL!

And hey, thanks for the clarification and expanded info on the European/Australian marketing! Interesting! Going back to look for that image of Kirk, Spock and the punk rock kid. LoL

 

Haha, yep...