The Production Team is Referring to this as "Star Trek 2"?

[Jackson_Roykirk]

We may not have an official title yet, but it seems the production team is giving this film the designation of being "#2" (please no #2/shit jokes) rather than #12...

...at least it seems that way by looking at the hat in this link, which was reportedly seen being worn by J.J. Abrams himself.
http://collider.com/star-trek-2-sequel-hat/161656/

 

[C.E. Evans]

I believe they--namely Abrams--is keeping the actual title of the film a secret, and we won't learn it until the first trailer is released.

 

[RCole]

A title of 2 suits me. Second of messed up, plot-holes-you-could-drive-a-Borg-cube-through, over the top, non-Trek. Keeps 'em clear in the mind.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

I believe they--namely Abrams--is keeping the actual title of the film a secret, and we won't learn it until the first trailer is released.

I realize this isn't the title of the film. I simply think it's interesting that the production team sees this as "Star Trek 2" rather than "Star Trek 12".

I'm OK with that, but I bet there are a lot of people who would claim there is only one film that should be referred to as Star Trek 2 -- and that would be TWoK.

 

[wissaboo]

I don't have a problem with it. All previous star trek movies have had a name and the fans gave them a number.

the last movie was simply entitled star trek. For this one to be star trek 2 is fine with me.

 

[Sindatur]

And anyone who has an issue with it, can simply view WoK as ST: II and JJAbrams Second Movie as ST:2

 

[Therin of Andor]

I bet there are a lot of people who would claim there is only one film that should be referred to as Star Trek 2 -- and that would be TWoK.

No, that was "Star Trek II".

Mind you, if you were at an initial screening of ST II in cinemas, for the first few weeks, the opening title (and early editions of the novelization) read, "Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan".

All previous star trek movies have had a name and the fans gave them a number.

No, STs III, IV, V and VI had official numbers. ST II got a number on prints issued a few weeks after the film's premiere.

 

[Trekkie2]

I believe they--namely Abrams--is keeping the actual title of the film a secret, and we won't learn it until the first trailer is released.

I realize this isn't the title of the film. I simply think it's interesting that the production team sees this as "Star Trek 2" rather than "Star Trek 12".

I'm OK with that, but I bet there are a lot of people who would claim there is only one film that should be referred to as Star Trek 2 -- and that would be TWoK.

You mean that other one filled with "messed up, plot-holes-you-could-drive-a-Borg-cube-through, over the top, non-Trek?"

Star Trek 2 beats the heck out of "Untitled." By the way, where can I get one of those hats.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I believe they--namely Abrams--is keeping the actual title of the film a secret, and we won't learn it until the first trailer is released.

I realize this isn't the title of the film. I simply think it's interesting that the production team sees this as "Star Trek 2" rather than "Star Trek 12".

The "2" in this instance could merely be the codename for "Abrams' second Trek movie".

But then, our own Trek Today had this to say back in December:

...Producer Bryan Burk was at [a] same function as [Simon] Pegg, and in answering a question, almost gave out a bit of information regarding the title of the Abrams sequel. “Oh, we’re not calling it Star Trek 2 anymore,” he said. “Just…” and then Burk stopped, realizing that he had almost let something slip.

http://www.trektoday.com/content/2011/12/pegg-knows-the-story/

 

[DEWLine]

It's still the twelfth movie to me.

*shrugs*

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

A title of 2 suits me. Second of messed up, plot-holes-you-could-drive-a-Borg-cube-through, over the top, non-Trek. Keeps 'em clear in the mind.

The second really successful, truly cinematic Star Trek movie. Yeah, that works.

I'm OK with that, but I bet there are a lot of people who would claim there is only one film that should be referred to as Star Trek 2 -- and that would be TWoK.

Sure, but who gives a damn? One can always find people who will complain about any stupid, trivial thing.

 

[RCole]

I knew someone would like the JJ Abrams movie. It's amazing to me what people like and don't. I guess we all like Star Trek which is diverse enough for individual parts to appeal to folks of wildly different tastes. YMMV of course.

 

[Amaris]

I knew someone would like the JJ Abrams movie. It's amazing to me what people like and don't. I guess we all like Star Trek which is diverse enough for individual parts to appeal to folks of wildly different tastes. YMMV of course.

Actually, a LOT of someones like the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie. Enough to where it became the highest grossing Star Trek film to date, rejuvenating the franchise, and bringing in new fans, while letting us old fans revisit some great memories in the process. Still, there are people who don't like it, and that's okay, it's not everyone's cup of tea. Liking or not liking the movie doesn't make anyone better than anyone else, it all comes down to personal taste.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Does anyone remember what First Contact was originally called? It was Star Trek Generations II. There's even a teaser trailer on youtube with that name. As in, the second Next Gen film. Like like this is the second reboot/alternate timeline movie.

Whatever they call it, I'm sure I'm gonna love it. I cannot wait! I hope we get the name and a teaser on May 13 - when the one-year countdown begins.

 

[Skywalker]

In a way it's both Star Trek 2 and Star Trek XII, so call it whichever you like.

 

[RCole]

I knew someone would like the JJ Abrams movie. It's amazing to me what people like and don't. I guess we all like Star Trek which is diverse enough for individual parts to appeal to folks of wildly different tastes. YMMV of course.

Actually, a LOT of someones like the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie. Enough to where it became the highest grossing Star Trek film to date, rejuvenating the franchise, and bringing in new fans, while letting us old fans revisit some great memories in the process. Still, there are people who don't like it, and that's okay, it's not everyone's cup of tea. Liking or not liking the movie doesn't make anyone better than anyone else, it all comes down to personal taste.

Exactly so. I meant, of course, "someone here." To my mind it's just "not what Trek is and should be" but I know some long time fans also like it. I dislike it enough to get rather preachy about it, but as long as it brings in new fans, AND the old timeline continues to be developed, I can see a benefit to it. (Even if typing that makes me cringe.)

 

[thumbtack]

Star Trek is not about "timelines".

 

[indranee]

We may not have an official title yet, but it seems the production team is giving this film the designation of being "#2" (please no #2/shit jokes) rather than #12...

...at least it seems that way by looking at the hat in this link, which was reportedly seen being worn by J.J. Abrams himself.
http://collider.com/star-trek-2-sequel-hat/161656/

 

[Sci]

Makes sense to me. When you think about it, there are really three separate series of Star Trek films.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, and Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country were sequels to Star Trek: The Motion Picture. First series.

Star Trek: Generations was not a sequel to Star Trek: The Motion Picture; it was a new film adaptation based upon Star Trek: The Next Generation. Star Trek: First Contact, Star Trek: Insurrection, and Star Trek: Nemesis were sequels to Star Trek: Generations, not to Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Second series.

Star Trek was a new, separate film adaptation based upon TOS, not a sequel to Star Trek: The Motion Picture. The next film will be a sequel to it, not Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Third series.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Star Trek is not about "timelines".

That's right.

Old timeline is old.

Cool crew hat.