Is there an official name in the works?

[USS Excelsior]

It should have an extended name, even the James Bond and Batman reboots do.

 

[M'Sharak]

Star Trek: Wait a Minute... Isn't Shatner Supposed to Be in This?
(And Who's that Old Guy Making the Spock Sign?)

 

[data65]

I've got it! Star Trek: Invasion of the Blue Warp Nacelles Thread Sombrero Remix!

"He's been slimed Jim." or "Damnit Jim I'm a doctor, not a Ghost Buster!"

 

[Sci]

It should have an extended name, even the James Bond and Batman reboots do.

No they don't. The Bond films have always just given a unique name to each entry and then relied upon marketing to make sure everyone knew they were Bond films. It's just Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, not James Bond: Casino Royale and James Bond: Quantum of Solace

The same thing seems to have happened with the Christopher Nolan Batman films. Instead of the Batman (Word) setup used by Burton and Shumaker, Nolan seems to be giving each film its own unique title. The first one is called Batman Begins because it establishes that it's set during the early part of Batman's career, but last year's The Dark Knight didn't even contain the word "Batman" at all. It wasn't called Batman: The Dark Knight.

If anything, just calling it Star Trek -- which, by the way, is a title that has never actually been used for a Trek film; even the first one was entitled Star Trek: The Motion Picture -- is more in line with just Nolan's just calling his film The Dark Knight or with the Bond films just being called Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace.

 

[andrewsean1701]

im quite happy to see it as STAR TREK:THE BEGINNING and hi im new to the forum, please can someone tell me how to put an avatar on please.

 

[andrewsean1701]

or simply

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

It should have an extended name, even the James Bond and Batman reboots do.

No. It really doesn't need one.

 

[miraclefan]

Is 'Star Trek' the official name of the movie or is it yet to be revealed? A name such as Star Trek XI, or Star Trek: Revenge of Nero, etc...?? Anyone have details?

DUDE! IT'S JUST STAR TREK! Why in the WORLD would you want to DRAG it down with a TITLE? Keep it simple,I mean it is supposed to be a reboot afterall!

 

[pookha]

star trek : the steriod era..


sorry but the nacelles

 

[Aragorn]

Maybe a Paramount executive will see this and, in the tradition of X-Men Origins: Wolverine and The Twilight Saga: New Moon, will decide that the title needs to convey more and the movie will be retitled Star Trek Origins: Kirk Begins.

 

[Michael]

It should have an extended name, even the James Bond and Batman reboots do.

No they don't. The Bond films have always just given a unique name to each entry and then relied upon marketing to make sure everyone knew they were Bond films. It's just Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, not James Bond: Casino Royale and James Bond: Quantum of Solace

The same thing seems to have happened with the Christopher Nolan Batman films. Instead of the Batman (Word) setup used by Burton and Shumaker, Nolan seems to be giving each film its own unique title. The first one is called Batman Begins because it establishes that it's set during the early part of Batman's career, but last year's The Dark Knight didn't even contain the word "Batman" at all. It wasn't called Batman: The Dark Knight.

If anything, just calling it Star Trek -- which, by the way, is a title that has never actually been used for a Trek film; even the first one was entitled Star Trek: The Motion Picture -- is more in line with just Nolan's just calling his film The Dark Knight or with the Bond films just being called Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace.

Well, if we are being all nit-picky here, it's Schumacher, not Shumaker.

 

[Skywalker]

Maybe a Paramount executive will see this and, in the tradition of X-Men Origins: Wolverine and The Twilight Saga: New Moon, will decide that the title needs to convey more and the movie will be retitled Star Trek Origins: Kirk Begins.

Beat you to it.

 

[Stag]

or simply

No, I'm sorry, I just don't think that will work.

 

[James Bond]

or simply

No, I'm sorry, I just don't think that will work.

Well then, it looks like you're going to have to deal with it because that's what it is... officially.

 

[miraclefan]

or simply

No, I'm sorry, I just don't think that will work.

Well then, it looks like you're going to have to deal with it because that's what it is... officially.

No it's not! It's SILVER! not GOLD.

 

[adg]

Star Trek: 2009.

 

[miraclefan]

Star Trek: 2009.

yyaaaaaahhhhh...It did'nt work for GALACTICA 1985, it won't work for TREK 2009!

 

[DaveyNY]

STAR TREK: The Raping We Didn't Get

STAR TREK: Another Promise Not Kept?

STAR TREK: The Wrath Of The Zealot's

STAR TREK: Can The Praisers Get Anymore Annoying?

STAR TREK: Rambutt Strikes Again

STAR TREK: Just Another Summer Movie

STAR TREK: It's Canon Folks!

STAR TREK: The Digital Film

STAR TREK: Once More Into The Frey (or) Once More To The Trough

STAR TREK: Feeding The Trolls

STAR TREK: Keeping It Alive

STAR TREK: Killing It Forever

STAR TREK: Updated

 

[M'Sharak]

You'll laugh. You'll cry. Even if you don't hate it outright, you'll probably be arguing about it passionately for the next three years (or until the next Trek Entertainment Product is announced, whichever comes first.)

It's...

STAR TREK: ATTACK OF THE TEMPORAL CALAMARI!
​

Or...

The One with the Tattooed Romulans.​

 

[Stag]

or simply

No, I'm sorry, I just don't think that will work.

Well then, it looks like you're going to have to deal with it because that's what it is... officially.

Relax Jimmy, maybe I should have added some of these to help you more fully understand the true depth of my droll comment...

;

Ta Ta - say hi to Q for me love.