Star Trek into Darkness
#41
Posted 14 September 2011 - 06:02 AM
#42
Posted 15 September 2011 - 01:32 AM
#43
Posted 27 October 2011 - 12:22 PM
Well of course it won't. There already IS a "Star Trek Two". And not only that, but it's the most highly-regarded movie in the entire franchise. Putting ANOTHER "Star Trek Two" out there is just asking for trouble.
But there's no word yet on what they WILL call this movie.
It's a challenge, to be sure.
The first six movies all had numbers, because they all starred the original-series cast (who, during the first four movies, were the only cast the franchise had ever known). But after that, they went to a non-numerical system; the next four movies all featured the Next Generation cast, and, given that they were just getting started on their big-screen adventures, it wouldn't have been right to call their first movie Star Trek 7 and their second movie Star Trek 8, etc. And then the eleventh movie just called itself plain old Star Trek because it wanted to establish itself as a reboot of sorts.
The problem now is that if any of these reboot sequels have short punchy titles like Star Trek: Sequel, it might end up sounding like one of the Next Generation movies (only one of which -- Star Trek: First Contact, the only one with a FOUR-word title! -- is really all that well-regarded). And a numerical title is pretty much out of the question because, as noted above, it's already been done and comparing part-two's in particular would just be a bad idea.
But what else can they do?
Well, perhaps they could go the route of the current wave of Batman movies and just avoid mentioning Batman -- er, I mean, Star Trek -- altogether. The Dark Knight was one of the most successful movies of all time even though it was the first of six (or seven, if you count the 1960s spin-off movie) Batman movies that didn't even mention Batman in the title. So maybe they could call this next movie Kirk Lives or Spock Dies or Where No Man/One/Thing Has Gone Before or Final Frontier (oh, wait, William Shatner already used that as part of the title for Star Trek 5) or The Needs of the One or some similarly thematically relevant thing.
Edited by Peter T Chattaway, 27 October 2011 - 12:23 PM.
#44
Posted 27 October 2011 - 12:29 PM
Or better yet, retitle all of them Captain Kirk/Picard and ______ of _______.
Captain Kirk and the Wrath of Khan
Captain Picard and the First Contact
#45
Posted 27 October 2011 - 12:37 PM
#46
Posted 27 October 2011 - 03:21 PM
#47
Posted 27 October 2011 - 04:04 PM
Sorry.
#48
Posted 27 October 2011 - 04:10 PM
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Juan (they battle a megalomaniac salsa dancer)
Star Trek III: The Search for Sporks (set on the Taco Bell planet)
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Gnome (Travelocity tie-in)
I'll stop now.
#49
Posted 27 October 2011 - 07:01 PM
Star Trek V: The Final Front Tire
Star Trek VI: The Undies-Covered Country
#50
Posted 27 October 2011 - 09:52 PM
#51
Posted 28 October 2011 - 09:34 AM
Seriously, though, I think a Star Trek: Literary-Sounding-Title idea has a lot of merit, like Star Trek: Where No Man Has Gone Before, or Star Trek: Vulcan's Forge or something like that.
#52
Posted 28 October 2011 - 03:42 PM
: Star Trek: Too!
Love it!
morgan1098 wrote:
: Star Trek: 2 Much Lens Flare
2 Star 2 Trek?
#53
Posted 29 October 2011 - 01:31 PM
And then it occurred to me that the Muppet franchise had never used numbers, like the original-series Star Trek films, and it had never used colons followed by short one- or two-word titles, like the next-generation Star Trek films. So maybe there is a form of sequel-titling that remains untapped here. Maybe the next round of J.J. Abrams films could have titles like:
- The Great Vulcan Caper
- The Klingons Take Romulus
- The Tribble Christmas Carol
- Borg Treasure Island
- Andorians in Space
#54
Posted 30 October 2011 - 12:24 PM
{later} Ah, here we go ... Whoopi Goldberg has a number of appearances on Sesame Street and other Muppet-related programs, in addition to her TNG work.
Edited by mrmando, 30 October 2011 - 04:04 PM.
#55
Posted 30 October 2011 - 08:35 PM
: Ah, here we go ... Whoopi Goldberg has a number of appearances on Sesame Street and other Muppet-related programs, in addition to her TNG work.
Egad. Whoopi Goldberg actually plays GOD in a Christmas-themed Muppet movie that my sister gave to my kids.
I'm not sure we should count Sesame Street episodes -- there are so, so many of them -- but if we do, then the first cross-over actor who comes to MY mind is Patrick Stewart:
I'll have more to say in another post; I can't post more than two videos in this one.
#56
Posted 30 October 2011 - 08:49 PM
Working backwards from the most recent film to the earliest film:
The Muppets (2011) apparently counts Sarah Silverman among its cast members; she played a scientist in a major two-part time-travel storyline in Star Trek: Voyager (1996).
Muppets from Space (1999) featured F. Murray Abraham, who had previously played the leader of the bad guys in Star Trek: Insurrection (1998).
Muppet Treasure Island (1996) was co-written by Kirk Thatcher, who played the punk that Spock nerve-pinches in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986); he also co-wrote 'I Hate You', the song that provokes Spock to take such action. Hmmm, it seems Thatcher also directed that Christmas movie with Whoopi Goldberg as God, as well as a bunch of those recent YouTube videos, e.g. this one:
Oh, and of course, how could I forget: the most significant single overlap between the world of Muppets and Star Trek is probably Gates McFadden, who choreographed a number of Henson projects (The Dark Crystal (1982), Labyrinth (1986)) and had a small part in The Muppets Take Manhattan (1984) before playing Dr. Crusher on Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987-1994) and its subsequent movies (1994-2002).
#57
Posted 30 October 2011 - 09:04 PM
... and William Shatner as well...
#58
Posted 01 November 2011 - 02:15 AM
Peter T Chattaway, on 30 October 2011 - 08:49 PM, said:
#59
Posted 01 November 2011 - 07:38 AM
#60
Posted 04 November 2011 - 07:16 PM
Quote
Insiders say Del Toro has met with Abrams but doesn't know what the role is, in order to keep in a secret.










