Star Trek 2 dated

[Bounty]

Just a minor update, but Star Trek 2 now has a sort of-official date:

http://twitter.com/ZacharyQuinto/status/7639399165

So, two and a half years to go.

[Gramzamber]

I wonder what they'll actually call it. Star Trek II? Star Trek 2 (no roman numeral)? Star Trek: Insert Subtitle Here?

[DaveJB]

It'll almost certainly be Star Trek: Insert Subtitle Here, simply to avoid confusion and comparisons with Wrath of Khan. At least that's what you'd expect - they did call the fourth Rambo film "Rambo" after all.

[Steve]

Heh, likely. I remember James Rolfe's AVGN rant on how Hollywood seems to have stopped reasonable numbering of movies for whatever reason, even if it prompts confusion (the Rambo example, and the Rocky "VI" one).

[tim31]

It'll almost certainly be Star Trek: Insert Subtitle Here, simply to avoid confusion and comparisons with Wrath of Khan. At least that's what you'd expect - they did call the fourth Rambo film "Rambo" after all.

Yeah, but for starters, a lot of people were calling it Rambo IV anyway, much the same as we all call Star Trek 'XI'. There was less expectation of a possible sequel for the Rambo job. Hence, if Paramount greenlit it as 'II' it'd be a massive fuck you to the cast, crew, and fans of the earlier films.

[Gramzamber]

I think Hollywood now has a collective fear that numbered sequels alienate potential new viewers.
Which is idiotic considering the new non-Star Trek fan viewers Star Trek IV got merely by having a broader appeal.

[Bellator]

AFAIK, none of the Star Trek movies after 6 have had a number. Or at least, they weren't marketed as such over here. It's been "Star Trek: subtitle" since Generations.

[Oskuro]

To be fair, Star Trek II, III and IV were part of the same extended storyline. The rest of the movies are more stand-alone affairs, so numbering isn't that important.