22 Stars wrote:
Why does that argument keep cropping up?
Let's nip this one, nobody in the general audience will "give a shit" about anyone from the Trek mythos beyond whether they provide solid entertainment value. The only people who will care either way are the fans. So it makes no difference whether you use Soran, Khan, Kang, Kor, Koloth, Garth of Izar, or Garry Mitchell. What matters is whether they're well written, well performed, and impress upon the audience a sense of gravitas, pathos, and importance.
Now, i'm not saying Soran was the way to go... I just don't understand the logic behind "the mass audience won't care." They won't care about any of this, one way or the other. They're not in it for that. All they care about is whether the movie is entertaining. Right?
OMG I want this on a T Shirt. Thank you for stating this so clearly. This is precisely why i think they made a mistake making Harrison = Khan.
Actually according to OpenMaw's post it wasn't a mistake. Maw may be correct that it didn't matter who they put in there to the casual audience even though of the names listed Khan is easily the most recognizable to non Trek fans and I think that is why they went that route.
Furthermore they did go with Khan and the movie made a lot of money and did well among critics and the movie going audience who all gave a majority of positive reviews.
People might have a point saying it was a mistake if the movie tanked, but that just wasn't the case.