'Star Trek 2' official title is revealed?

'Star Trek 2' may have gotten its official title, and it hints at the direction the franchise is taking the new movie.

Paramount/AP
'Star Trek 2' may have gotten an official title, judging by a domain name registered by Paramount.

The wait is still on for the sequel to J.J. Abrams’ critical and financial hit that was his reboot of the Star Trek franchise. Ever since the director opened up about the basic story and casting, the topic of interest (beyond who, exactly, the villain will be) has been the talk of the stakes being raised for Star Trek 2, with no punches likely to be pulled.

Now the film’s title seems to have been revealed, and it speaks to the harsher, more hard-hitting story that lies in store. We still don’t know the details of the plot, but Star Trek Into Darkness will once again give Abrams and company the opportunity to blaze a new trail. 

The title was uncovered by TrekMovie.com when Paramount appeared to be purchasing the domains for both ‘www.startrekintodarkness.com’ and ‘www.startrekintodarknessmovie.com,’ with the site now claiming that the title has been confirmed. While an official announcement from either Abrams or Paramount is yet to be found, the title fits with the general impression that’s been given to this point. In an age of sequels and serializations, it’s worth pointing out that the title does not feature a colon (like other Star Trek films), which would seem to bear some significance.

Unfortunately, the title doesn’t provide any new insight into the “exciting” role being played by Benedict Cumberbatch. But the possible (spoiler-rific) villain that Karl Urban previously revealed and the original Star Trek series plot line that goes along with it fit the mood portrayed by the new title exceedingly well.

The new face of Captain Kirk – and the franchise – Chris Pine, recently attempted to lighten the impression that Abrams’ sequel would be all doom and gloom by explaining that no one involved is intent on “making Batman.” The obvious allusion is to Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy, a grim and generally dark portrayal of personal conflict and the battle between good and evil. Since Abrams’ Star Trek managed to inject several one-liners and humor bordering on slapstick (“numb tongue??”) into a genocidal plot, the idea of a massive tonal shift wouldn’t be just bad news for fans, but potentially less appealing for a summer blockbuster crowd.

It doesn’t come as a surprise then, that Paramount is taking its time in deciding how to introduce the new branding. This summer showed how a film like The Dark Knight Rises – advertised as a taut, gripping drama – can be out-sold by The Avengers, a film much closer to the tone and style of Star Trek. So expect to see the unveiling of the ‘Into Darkness’ branding alongside some footage or marketing material that shows Kirk and Spock trading jabs.

We were expecting the sequel to Star Trek to push even further into the unexplored, making good use of the potential discovered with one of the most successful reboots in recent memory. If Abrams and his new Enterprise crew are taking things to a more serious and relentlessly honest place, fans might get the best of both worlds. And whether the villain of the film is Khan, Gary Mitchell, or some other character that co-screenwriters Kurtzman and Orci can think up, it seems that the film will at least be trying something different than its predecessor.

Andrew Dyce blogs at Screen Rant.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.