Lindelof talks title, and time gap

[BillJ]

Last I checked, NCC-1701 was still called "the Starship Enterprise" in Star Trek XI.

But it wasn't the name of the movie. The creative/marketing people would have to be dipshits to name it Starship Enterprise. No offense. Let's take our two hundred million dollar film and practically name it after a failed TV series from less than a decade earlier.

 

[Sindatur]

Last I checked, NCC-1701 was still called "the Starship Enterprise" in Star Trek XI.

But it wasn't the name of the movie. The creative/marketing people would have to be dipshits to name it Starship Enterprise. No offense. Let's take our two hundred million dollar film and practically name it after a failed TV series from less than a decade earlier.

I don't really see a difference between calling it Enterprise in the title (which is the name of all the NCC1701 ships, as well as the NX-01) and all the nods to the Series Enterprise, Admiral Archer's dog, etc....

If they know the Series well enough to associate the ship name from 3 different series and 11 films with the Series Enterprise, they know it well enough to catch the nods, IMHO

 

[C.E. Evans]

Last I checked, NCC-1701 was still called "the Starship Enterprise" in Star Trek XI.

But it wasn't the name of the movie. The creative/marketing people would have to be dipshits to name it Starship Enterprise. No offense. Let's take our two hundred million dollar film and practically name it after a failed TV series from less than a decade earlier.

That no one outside of Trekdom remembers these days.

On the other hand, the term "the Starship Enterprise" has been in use in popular culture for decades prior to ENT and is still associated with "Star Track" in general.

 

[BillJ]

They won't call it Starship Enterprise. There's no reason to hide that title from the public as it is about as generic as it can get and offers no insight into the content of the film.

Now if it's called Where No Man Has Gone Before, they would be basically letting the proverbial cat out of the bag by putting out the name this early.

The marketing people are probably well aware of the film's title with under ten months until release.

 

[shivkala]

With the exception of a title that gives away spoilers, does it really matter? They might as well call it Star Trek, It Doesn't Matter What We Say Here, You Know You're Going To See It. I do wonder if he's being a bit facetious, since there's not much else you can do aside from giving it a number or a colon past the Star Trek.

Though, truth be told, I do like Star Trek: Transformers 4.

 

[C.E. Evans]

They won't call it Starship Enterprise.

I believe it's as safe a bet as any. "The Starship Enterprise" is a term still more associated with Star Trek in general to the public than a short-lived spinoff that ended nearly a decade ago.

By your logic, then they really should have renamed NCC-1701 something other than Enterprise in Star Trek XI because ENT got cancelled a few years earlier.

 

[Sindatur]

They won't call it Starship Enterprise. There's no reason to hide that title from the public as it is about as generic as it can get and offers no insight into the content of the film.

Now if it's called Where No Man Has Gone Before, they would be basically letting the proverbial cat out of the bag by putting out the name this early.

The marketing people are probably well aware of the film's title with under ten months until release.

Where no Man has Gone before doesn't need to have anything to do with Gary Mitchell? First Contact TNG episode has nothing to do wtih First Contact TNG Movie.

Where No Man Has Gone Before is part of the TOS opening Theme, it could represent anything new (which is pretty much everything in this current continuity)

 

[Cyke101]

They won't call it Starship Enterprise. There's no reason to hide that title from the public as it is about as generic as it can get and offers no insight into the content of the film.

Now if it's called Where No Man Has Gone Before, they would be basically letting the proverbial cat out of the bag by putting out the name this early.

The marketing people are probably well aware of the film's title with under ten months until release.

Where no Man has Gone before doesn't need to have anything to do with Gary Mitchell? First Contact TNG episode has nothing to do wtih First Contact TNG Movie.

So they'd be taking a cue from the James Bond franchise then, which I have absolutely no problem with really, as long as it's handled well. But man, Gary 7 will be a PR nightmare

Anyway, I like the suggestion of Starship Enterprise, but yeah, some good points to be made about the ST: ENT. Still, it's almost enough to make me wish the latter could just be renamed somehow...

 

[C.E. Evans]

They won't call it Starship Enterprise. There's no reason to hide that title from the public as it is about as generic as it can get and offers no insight into the content of the film.

Now if it's called Where No Man Has Gone Before, they would be basically letting the proverbial cat out of the bag by putting out the name this early.

The marketing people are probably well aware of the film's title with under ten months until release.

Where no Man has Gone before doesn't need to have anything to do with Gary Mitchell? First Contact TNG episode has nothing to do wtih First Contact TNG Movie.

So they'd be taking a cue from the James Bond franchise then, which I have absolutely no problem with really, as long as it's handled well. But man, Gary 7 will be a PR nightmare

Anyway, I like the suggestion of Starship Enterprise, but yeah, some good points to be made about the ST: ENT. Still, it's almost enough to make me wish the latter could just be renamed somehow...

The name "Starship Enterprise" hasn't been poisoned forever because ENT got cancelled seven years ago.

 

[Christopher]

I do wonder if he's being a bit facetious, since there's not much else you can do aside from giving it a number or a colon past the Star Trek.

Since when? Over the decades there have been many different approaches to titling sequels or installments of film series. Numbers and colons are a convention that didn't really start to emerge until the 1970s and didn't become widespread until the '80s. (Did you know that in its original theatrical release, the second Trek movie -- and its novelization -- was just called Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan? It didn't get relabeled as Star Trek II until later. Although the original soundtrack album did use the "II.") And the use of numbers seems to be going out of favor in recent years, as we've seen with series like Pirates of the Caribbean, Underworld, Resident Evil, the Nolan Batman films, the recently announced Captain America and Thor sequels, and, of course, the TNG films.

Of course, the title Star Trek is more limiting than some, because it's kind of abstract. You can't do something like Star Trek and the Temple of Doom or The Star Trek Rises. Numbers are unnecessary, but either ST: Subtitle or a title with no ST at all seem to be the only options.

 

[Harvey]

(Did you know that in its original theatrical release, the second Trek movie -- and its novelization -- was just called Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan? It didn't get relabeled as Star Trek II until later. Although the original soundtrack album did use the "II.")

It seems that the decision to add the subtitle "II" was made rather close to the film's release. Thus, some marketing material had it and some didn't; 70mm prints didn't have it (some of which are still in circulation), but 35mm prints did.

 

[Christopher]

Well, my first exposures to TWOK, both the book and the movie (since I read the book first), were without the number, so it always felt unnecessary to me when they added in the number. I prefer the way the TNG films did it, just series title and "episode" title. Hey, it worked for the show.

 

[Cyke101]

Where no Man has Gone before doesn't need to have anything to do with Gary Mitchell? First Contact TNG episode has nothing to do wtih First Contact TNG Movie.

So they'd be taking a cue from the James Bond franchise then, which I have absolutely no problem with really, as long as it's handled well. But man, Gary 7 will be a PR nightmare

Anyway, I like the suggestion of Starship Enterprise, but yeah, some good points to be made about the ST: ENT. Still, it's almost enough to make me wish the latter could just be renamed somehow...

The name "Starship Enterprise" hasn't been poisoned forever because ENT got cancelled seven years ago.

Sure, but ultimately that's not really my decision to make, but rather on the studio execs who might have remembered the show. If they choose to go with the title, then that's great; if not, I'm willing to bet that old show might become the scapegoat (however fair or unfair that may be).

 

[ChristopherPike]

I really do like the ongoing idea of the first sequel being subtitled, "To Boldly Go", followed by either WNMHGB or WNOHGB. I think it rocks. But I would imagine the idea has been spun around countless times, and if they truly have yet to arrive at anything definitive, they've determined there is an issue with this concept.

This works best for me. Star Trek in a smaller font, or appearing first and then drifting off into the distance... with TO BOLDLY GO zooming into view afterwards.

Same deal with whatever a third is called. Think of titles, phrases, that could standalone and scream Star Trek - even though most won't give up putting that and a colon before it all the same.

It just screams "Do it!" to me. Although they'll probably end up going for something Star Wars pulp fictiony... like an Attack of the, or a Vengeance from, followed by [insert well-known alien race here].

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I still like my idea

The Ongoing Mission

 

[BillJ]

I still like my idea

The Ongoing Mission

I really don't. It says "yes, you have seen this before".

 

[Greg Cox]

There are all sorts of sequel-naming traditions to follow:

Bride of Star Trek

Star Trek the Invincible

Star Trek Strikes Back

Star Trek Goes Hawaiian

Taste the Blood of Star Trek

Sadly, Abbott & Costello Meet Star Trek is no longer an option.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

I really do like the ongoing idea of the first sequel being subtitled, "To Boldly Go", followed by either WNMHGB or WNOHGB. I think it rocks. But I would imagine the idea has been spun around countless times, and if they truly have yet to arrive at anything definitive, they've determined there is an issue with this concept.

This works best for me. Star Trek in a smaller font, or appearing first and then drifting off into the distance... with TO BOLDLY GO zooming into view afterwards.

Same deal with whatever a third is called. Think of titles, phrases, that could standalone and scream Star Trek - even though most won't give up putting that and a colon before it all the same.

It just screams "Do it!" to me. Although they'll probably end up going for something Star Wars pulp fictiony... like an Attack of the, or a Vengeance from, followed by [insert well-known alien race here].

Oh my gobrino, ChristopherPike, that picture is simply beautiful. And I do mean simply beautiful. It is simple. And it is beautiful. It...

...ahem, well anyway. I quite like it. Make it so, Powers That Be.

 

[M'Sharak]

My votes:
Star Trek for Stupid People Who Want It to be a Comic Book Movie

That's crossing a line. It's one thing to express the opinion that a movie is stupid, but you have no right to call its fans stupid. That's just petty personal attack and there's no excuse for it. People don't deserve to be insulted just because they liked a movie you didn't.

I wasn't crossing the line. Not the way you think I was.

Call me a bit skeptical about that. The attempt to pass it off as a joke, the weak "Even though I was calling fans stupid ... I wasn't actually calling them stupid" explanation and the overall defensive tone of the rest of your post don't convincingly suggest that you fully believe that story either.

Christopher was correct. Insulting groups of fans is poor form (even if intended as a joke,) it's unnecessary to the discussion, and it's something I'd prefer to see avoided here - by you and by everyone.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

There are also sorts of sequel-naming traditions to follow:

Bride of Star Trek

Star Trek the Invincible

Star Trek Strikes Back

Star Trek Goes Hawaiian

Taste the Blood of Star Trek

Sadly, Abbott & Costello Meet Star Trek is no longer an option.

Star Trek SG-1

Star and Trek's Excellent Adventure

Star Trek Miami

Star Trek Special Victims Unit

Late Night with Star Trek

Star Trek: The Beginning (oh, wait)