This movie may not be a "follow-up" to Nemesis, but it does FOLLOW Nemesis chronologically by 8 years. Well, Spock Prime does anyway. So it is connected to our old universe.
The final decision on the movie's reference title...
- Thread starter gastrof
- Start date
This movie may not be a "follow-up" to Nemesis, but it does FOLLOW Nemesis chronologically by 8 years. Well, Spock Prime does anyway. So it is connected to our old universe.
Neutrek Now with 50% less calories!
Up to now the films and series have been abbreviated with three letters. That'd make Insurrection "INS".
Never heard it called ST09. Not even STIX.
ST9, maybe? But 09? I don't think so.
Since we haven't used the 0-anything method until now, that'd make 09 stand out. Since the next film is sure to be called something other than simply "Star Trek" (likely another case of Star Trek: Subtitle as we've had before), that'd STILL leave "09" as unique and not confused with anything earlier or later.
Technically, that's correct. But conceptually the whole raison d'etre for this movie is to make a break from the previous sequence. Treating it like just another sequel misses the point.
Agreed on that.
The alternate reality was done to maintain continuity and avoid bombs under JJ's car but the movie IS a complete reboot.
Still, as these discussion would continue one way or the other, we should expect for all subsequent movie NOT have any numbers attached.
Several, actually.
That depends on the use. My DVD rips are numbered "ST 01" through "ST 10" (admittedly, with the titles after) -- you need the leading zero in order to maintain alphabetization.
I just don't think anybody is going to agree on what to call STMOVXI.
How about ST009XI has kinda nice ring to it
You are completely wrong on every point. This film is a sequel to the 735 episodes that came before it. "Star Trek IV" wasn't a prequel because it took place in 1986. It was a time travel story that logically followed the events in "Star Trek III." That's EXACTLY what this movie is. A sequel set in an earlier time period due to time travel by characters from a time following the previous movie.
"Star Trek" was The Original Series, or TOS for short. But all the ongoing episodes and movies, from TNG to "Voyager" and "Enterprise," are all continuations of "Star Trek," thus the need to specify the first 79 episodes of TOS as opposed to the 657 "Star Trek" episodes that came later.
No one needs to imply this is a follow-up to "Nemesis." That's exactly what it is, just as "Nemesis" was a follow-up to "Insurrection."
Everything that took place in this film is a logical consequence of events that happened after the previous 10 films in the series. It is a continuation of the story that has been going on for 735 episodes.
The only "reboot agenda" is to create a jumping-on point for new fans. TNG was not a reboot of TOS, nor was DS9 a reboot of TNG. Each is simply a continuation of the established "Star Trek" universe, just taking that universe in a new direction to create fresh storylines.
I think you are missing the point. You are comparing this film to "Batman" or James Bond. "Batman Begins" and "Casino Royale" were not sequels to the previous films using the same characters. They are legitimately called "reboots," or "remakes."
The premise of a "reboot" depends on the audience willing to ignore or forget what was in the previous incarnation, in order to start a fresh story in a different, mutually exclusive continuity. The same is true of "Battlestar Galactica."
But "Star Trek" has never been "rebooted." The story has continued uninterupted through all 703 TV episodes and 11 movies.
If anything, "Star Trek II" was a reboot of "The Motion Picture." ("Just ignore that previous lame movie with no character development. This is where the real story begins.")
"Star Trek XI" depends on fans' familiarity with the characters, the obscure references to "Melvaran mud fleas," "I have been, and always shall be, your friend," Spock's work as an ambassador on Romulus, etc. Yes, like TNG, it is a jumping-on point for new fans, and they can enjoy it without having seen the previous episodes, but it is not, by any definition, a reboot. It is, by every definition, a sequel.
I think folks in this forum are getting a little carried away with the word "reboot." I actually saw someone here call "Terminator 4" a reboot.
Apparently, some people think "reboot" means "a sequel that is more successful than the episode before it," or "any sequel that I don't personally enjoy as much as another." That is not the proper usage of the word, and I will continue to fight any attempt to do so.
Don't let the time travel fool you. "Star Trek XI" is a sequel. Not a prequel. Not a reboot.
A
Amaris
Guest
Let's see, we have:
ST:TMP
ST:TWOK
ST:TSFS
ST:TVH
ST:TFF
ST:TUC
ST:GEN
ST:FC
ST:INS
ST:NEM
So maybe:
ST, ST:STAR or ST:STR
It could be shortened to 'STR' when we're talking about the movies.
J.
ST:TMP
ST:TWOK
ST:TSFS
ST:TVH
ST:TFF
ST:TUC
ST:GEN
ST:FC
ST:INS
ST:NEM
So maybe:
ST, ST:STAR or ST:STR
It could be shortened to 'STR' when we're talking about the movies.
J.
JJTrek for me.
Star Trek fans, why so uptight?
You just got a film from Kid Dyn-o-MITE!
It shows its the 11th star trek. Its really that simple
We absolutely need an abbreviation. ALL trek has an abbreviation
Nah. Makes me wonder how strong it is.
I'm confused why it's so hard to accept that this is the 11th Trek movie and is therefore ST11. The freaking board is titled Star Trek XI. I'm using arabic numbers instead of roman numerals because I'm lazy. It's freaking Star Trek 11 people, get the hell over it.
A
Amaris
Guest
I'm sorry, that was terrible. You will be punished.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to tickle you.
I'm okay with ST11 or STXI. I'm just trying to help sort things out.
J.
No movie since Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country has had any numbers attached officially, so it's pretty obvious that STXII won't be called STXII either. And that's fine, it'll have a subtite, and we'll refer to it as whatever that subtitle is. The point is to have an abbreviation for "Star Trek" (2009). STXI is the one we've been using, most accurate, and most consistent. STXII will be called STXII until it has a subtitle.
It is possible they will retroactively add a subtitle to XI. "The Future Begins" has been floating around. We'll see if that sticks.
