[dominion_ruler]

In the new Abramsverse, everything before the arrival of Nero remains, and it looks like after that, anything goes. We of course know Khan exists, and is out there asleep with his followers on the Botany Bay. But, how close to the original story would you like this version (if the rumors that Khan is indeed the villain) to be? If he is awoken, it will already be approx. 10 years before the date in Space Seed (maybe a few years less). But, who awakens him? The Enterprise? Another starship? The Klingons? The Romulans? Already, we have possibilities that could shift things in many directions. In any event, we can probably guarantee, Khan will try to take control of any ship or people. And one other thing, what's a story of Khan without a personal interest in James Kirk? Speculate....

[Bill]

Granted there are endless possibilities with a alternate timeline Khan. However the original 5 year voyage of the Enterprise also has the a universe of possibilities for new characters and stories.
Hollywood needs some original thinking. I, for one, am getting tired of all the remakes that are being cranked out.

[jonathan]

So i have read Khan might be in the new movie, how true is that rumor? or do you know for sure?

[dominion_ruler]

jonathan, on 10 December 2011 - 02:10 AM, said:

So i have read Khan might be in the new movie, how true is that rumor? or do you know for sure?

Apparently more than one source has now nodded to this, but a rumor is still a rumor. My opinion is that it is probably true. Abrams is looking for a Latino to play the villain (Montalban was Latino) and he has looked into Hawaii for a jungle setting (in the books, Ceti Alpha V is noted as a jungle planet before Ceti Alpha VI explodes and lays it to waste). There has also been some talk in interviews with the writers that Star Trek XII needs to be bigger than Star Trek XI, comparing it often to the Dark Knight over Batman Begins. Well, Dark Knight had the Joker, most iconic Batman villain. Khan is probably the most iconic Star Trek villain.

I just wonder when I connect the dots....

[Radardog]

This is what a lot of people don't get: Khan isn't the most iconic Star Trek villain. He never was.

Khan was used in Star Trek II because they wanted to present characters with history and depth. They looked for a villain that presented an echo of Kirk's youth haunting him. Khan was that character.

Before this Khan was just a megalomaniac they left on Ceti Alpha V... and Kirk and him parted on fairly friendly terms.

"Hey, sorry I tried to kill you and take over your ship. That's kind of my thing."

"It's cool. Colonize this planet and we'll forget it ever happened."

And it probably would have remained that way if Ceti Alpha VI hadn't ruined their planet, killing Khan's wife and forcing them to live in a virtual hell.

Khan isn't all that iconic of a character. The Joker is iconic because of who he is. He's insane and twisted and murderous. Even after an episode and film about him, we don't really know much about Khan. He's intelligent and a great leader. He's driven, and in TWOK, he's driven by hatred. All of this is fascinating, but hardly iconic. It doesn't represent what Star Trek is, doesn't represent what Kirk is and doesn't really present anything all that original.

Star Trek II is iconic. The story is iconic. Mostly because it holds up better than the other films. People can relate to the story well becayse you have classic story themes of sacrifice, vengeance and self-renewal. But none of this makes Khan the greatest Trek villain

If we want to be honest, the iconic Trek villains are the Klingons. They are the most utilized antagonists. In TOS, they were the Federation's arch enemy. In TNG, they were the Federation's most intriguing ally. They have a rich and developed culture. And they have become quite popular with the fans.

The only other villains that reach that level of icon is the Borg, and they just don't work in TOS. They're Picard's nemesis. They're Janeway's nemesis. They're not a Kirk and Spock thing and nobody should really attempt to film such a meshing of those things.

There are other great villains like the Q, the Romulans and the Dominion. But they don't have the universal appeal the Klingons and Borg have had.

So, if they're looking for Trek icons, the Klingons would be my vote.

Considering that Benedict Cumberbatch was cast as the villain, and I've seen production photos, I'm willing to bet the Klingons and Khan have little to do with the film.

The Khan rumor rose from the interest in a Hispanic actor, which was ridiculous because even though a Hispanic played Khan, Khan isn't Hispanic. He's Indian. And if they were to ever recast Khan, I would hope they would attempt to cast an Indian in the role. Looking for a Hispanic to play Khan isn't casting the character, but rather casting Ricardo Montalbon. That's poor casting.

I don't have a clue what Cumberbatch represents. Maybe he's Harry Mudd. Maybe he's something new. I hope he isn't another Khan rip-off like was used in Generations, Nemesis, and even Star Trek (2009). Vengeance is fun and all, but it gets a little old.

And so have the cries for Khan. The story has been told. Abrams' Trek is an exciting and interesting place. I want to see what's different there. Not what's the same.

[Beast Boy]

I hope that Khan will be in next Star Trek movie,because he is most awesome character in this sci fi saga.
Me this personage very like when he first time come in episode "Space seed" and in "wrath of khan",he is really very evil villains,who want destroy Federation planet.I will be very joy if Khan will be come in "Star Trek-12".

[Radardog]

I just read the TrekMovie.com rumor that Cumberbatch is playing Khan. I think I'm going to go vomit now.

I know I complained a lot about some of the decisions for the last film, and after seeing the film, I decided that I appreciated the differences for what they were.

But a rehash of Khan is the most uninspired thing they could have come up with as a sequel. Do we just make fan service movies now? Wrath of Khan was a great movie, but before that film, nobody cared about Khan and he brings nothing to the table as far as defining our characters. At least Picard's turn as a Borg played a lot into who Picard's character was.

Let's just say I'm pretty disappointed about this. Was really excited for what was next in the Abramsverse. Could have really worked their brains to create a unique villain. But couldn't resist the temptation to just rehash.

[Bill]

I am annoyed as well.

Seeing Nimoy again will be OK, and bringing Klingons in is also acceptable.
Kirks antagonist/protagonist relationship with Khan in this movie better be a huge departure from Space Seed and The Wrath of Con for Abrams to pull it off.

[ensign edwards]

Somehow, I'm not surprised they couldn't come up with anything other than a Khan rehash.

[Barbara]

Bill, on 08 December 2011 - 08:39 AM, said:

Granted there are endless possibilities with a alternate timeline Khan. However the original 5 year voyage of the Enterprise also has the a universe of possibilities for new characters and stories.
Hollywood needs some original thinking. I, for one, am getting tired of all the remakes that are being cranked out.

Agree 160.79% and then some.

We need new blood and forward thinkers in Hollywood. We've lost the creative thinkers. Disappointing.

[dominion_ruler]

http://trekmovie.com...-is-not-remake/




Bob Orci says "no remakes, no rehashes"...so, hoping this is indeed true after all and we do get an original story and villain.

[Beast Boy]

dominion_ruler, on 12 May 2012 - 09:28 AM, said:

http://trekmovie.com...-is-not-remake/




Bob Orci says "no remakes, no rehashes"...so, hoping this is indeed true after all and we do get an original story and villain.

This is will be good,of course if this news is really true.
If this is true-will be very interesting watching not alternative timeline which was in last "Star trek" movies.

This post has been edited by Beast Boy: 12 May 2012 - 10:47 AM

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

Radardog, on 10 April 2012 - 12:42 PM, said:

The Khan rumor rose from the interest in a Hispanic actor, which was ridiculous because even though a Hispanic played Khan, Khan isn't Hispanic. He's Indian. And if they were to ever recast Khan, I would hope they would attempt to cast an Indian in the role. Looking for a Hispanic to play Khan isn't casting the character, but rather casting Ricardo Montalbon. That's poor casting.

Nice sentiment Radardog, but I seem to recall you were one of those who upbraided me when I suggested that Uhura should have been played by an actress from Africa! I'm glad to see you're coming around to my way of thinking at least a little bit!

Meanwhile, haven't we all just been through the same old rumour mill that happened last time around when every single fanboy and girl started putting forward their favourite actors for a role in Star Trek 2009? How many actors did we all jaw about and who never even got close to a screen test?

I am personally heartened by the choice of Cumberbatch to play the villain because he has a kind of intensity that a Star Trek movie villain needs to be memorable. However, if it is true and he's playing Khan then, frankly, I have to ask WTH was the point in the alternative timeline if Abramsverse is basically going to go where we've all been before?

If he is Khan, let's hope this is a different story of Khan doing something completely different in the alternate timeline ... pretty please? It could work, it could be ace, but I don't think there are many fans - old or new - who want to see TWOK remade since it was pretty fine the first time.

I don't think there'll be Romulans this time around - my own view that both occasions were missed opportunities to flesh out one of Trek's more mysterious enemy races and Klingons - meh - done to death really, is there anymore we can learn about them? I can't see a Borg movie beating First Contact, and if I were Abrams & Co, I would go anywhere the movies that scored the highest marks amongst fans such as TWOK, TVH, and FC. Human villains really have to be a lot more memorable than Dr. Soran or more readable than Shinzon for the audience, and Cumberbatch could be just the man.

This post has been edited by JulesLuvsShinzon: 15 May 2012 - 07:50 AM

[ensign edwards]

Quote

Nice sentiment Radardog, but I seem to recall you were one of those who upbraided me when I suggested that Uhura should have been played by an actress from Africa! I'm glad to see you're coming around to my way of thinking at least a little bit!

To be fair, there is a matter of degrees here. Hiring a black woman not from Africa to play Uhura is one thing, but getting someone who's obviously the wrong race to play Khan is another. The analogy would be if they'd tried to hire an Asian woman to play Uhura.

Quote

However, if it is true and he's playing Khan then, frankly, I have to ask WTH was the point in the alternative timeline if Abramsverse is basically going to go where we've all been before?

This is what I've been asking since the first movie.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

ensign edwards, on 15 May 2012 - 10:27 AM, said:

To be fair, there is a matter of degrees here. Hiring a black woman not from Africa to play Uhura is one thing, but getting someone who's obviously the wrong race to play Khan is another. The analogy would be if they'd tried to hire an Asian woman to play Uhura.

I'd say it depends on how much value one places on the cultural context of the character as well as that character's race. I place a very high importance upon the fact that Uhura was not an African-American but an African woman who spoke Swahili. For me, race and culture are separate issues worthy of joint and equal consideration. I understand that an African American was originally cast in TOS, but there's a thriving film industry in Africa now and there's less excuse for Hollywood blinkers and cookie-cutter casting. There's some cultural value in challenging societal notions about race in High Culture - such as casting a white man as Othello - but Star Trek isn't it and it feels lazy to me, much as Radardog has issues with the casting of a well-known Mexican actor as a charismatic Indian. Yep, I get that totally: to me Khan was a character of uncertain racial origins created as part of the Eugenics programme which might have blended races artificially, and maybe a pretender to the title of some historic grandee of the future - but not an Asian man at all.

Quote

This is what I've been asking since the first movie.

****High Fives! ***

[Fan Producer]

With Khan, it'll be a reboot AND a remake. How original.

[Kirok]

Fan Producer, on 19 May 2012 - 11:10 PM, said:

With Khan, it'll be a reboot AND a remake. How original.

That's a bit simplistic. You could say exactly the same thing about the second Sherlock Holmes movie by Robert Downey-Junior: A Game of Shadows and yet it has grossed only slightly less than the first of the series. Personally I think the second film was better than the first. What we are hoping for is for JJ to do the same thing with his Trek movies: build on each to create a new and steadily enlarging mythos There are some who might say that by re-using iconic characters like Khan he is not creating something new but again you can say the same about Jack Nicholson's and Heath Ledger's Joker.

It is in the nature of things that they will be re-interpreted for new generations.

K

PS Hi Jules! Long time no see!

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

Hi Kirok!

It's been so quiet around here that I sort of gave up dropping by and then I saw Radardog was back and I thought I throw in a few cents of my own - not that things are anything like as lively as they were three years ago - or during the four years from the cancellation of Enterprise and the release of Star Trek 2009, and that I find odd and vaguely disheartening. It seems as though the summer blockbuster market has matured and left the franchise behind once again.

I've been amazed that Bad Robot seems to have dropped the ball on this one and didn't capitalise of the relative success of the last film - there should have been a sequel out this summer at the very latest but it seems the producers got hung-up or overcommitted in producing other projects. Progress on a sequel seems to have faltered in its early stages. It's inproduction now and that's great, but I wonder if the new-won fans from the last film won't have moved on and forgotten about the movie they liked three years ago, and in the meantime the really big superhero franchises have taken off in an even bigger way than before.

As for Khan: my first response when I heard the rumours was definitely "meh" and some frustration that the creation of the alternative "Abramsverse" might simply default into lazy remake territory and lame reinvention of something that work very well the first time around. I am somewhat mollified by the casting of Cumberbatch because he is a huge property right now with high value stock he'll want to protect, therefore the script has to be - just has to be - something that has convinced him he needs to be a part of this project. He has successfully made over Sherlock Holmes in his own image that pleases even diehard Sherlock fans like me because his performance seems to understand that it is the essence of an iconic character that must survive, and pulling that off means that even the most iconic characters can be moved into other timescales and adventures. In some respects, screenwriters are getting very good at this and there is no reason why Khan can't be rebooted in the new timeline - as long as the new adventure is worthwhile and that central tension between Kirk and Khan is kept in place.

I think that Kirok is correct, there is room within a franchise for two actors to interpret an iconic character in very different ways, and the example of the Riddler is a good one in this context. Bond has been made over a few times but has always remained essentially Bond. I think this type of reinterpretation works well with edgy characters or villains.

[Fan Producer]

I guess it's going to come down to how the Trek Universe evolves. If it's going to require reinterpretations, like the origin stories of Superman, Batman, and Spiderman, then, yes, reboots can work. But ST did NOT take this route; it went to a next generation, then went back to a previous one. And even the reboot was NOT a reboot; it was something that created an alternate timeline, so I would look at it differently from the reboots of Superman and Spiderman.

But that's just me.

[Kirok]

Fan Producer, on 20 May 2012 - 01:32 PM, said:

If it's going to require reinterpretations, like the origin stories of Superman, Batman, and Spiderman, then, yes, reboots can work. But ST did NOT take this route; it went to a next generation, then went back to a previous one. And even the reboot was NOT a reboot; it was something that created an alternate timeline, so I would look at it differently from the reboots of Superman and Spiderman.

Seeing a storyline progress neatly along a timeline as we did from TOS to TNG to DSN and VOY is comforting but its not the only way of doing things, you said it yourself, "the reboot was NOT a reboot; it was something that created an alternate timeline". This is an alternate universe where, because the Narada stood on a butterfly in 2233, just about anything could happen! The Botany Bay might be discovered by someone else - the Klingons - and Khan wipes them out causing an intersteller incident that he manipulates to his benefit. Or Khan crash-lands on Kamino where he takes over the clone factories... oops wrong franchise!

The thing that sticks in my mind is that Kirk in Space Seed stopped Khan's ambitions in their track - essentially the start of their story - whereas Wrath of Khan was the classic showdown between the two closing off the story. What I'm hoping to see is a new take on that story - a Khan who creates a *real* challenge to the UFP instead of voluntarily opening a frontier on Ceti Alpha V, perhaps a Khan with even more charisma than Shinzon?

Benedict Cumberbatch certainly has a big act to follow, Ricardo Montalban played Khan to perfection, but I remember thinking that about Jack Nicholson's Joker.

K